---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3583/#review8591
---
Hi Nicolas, thanks for the contribution. Couple of things before you
> On Aug. 5, 2016, 7:15 a.m., Andreas Hansson wrote:
> > I see how this works as a stop gap, but ultimately I would like to push for
> > the removal of the shadow memory as the first option. Is it really that
> > much effort?
>
> David Hashe wrote:
> I'm not personally familiar enough
> On Aug. 5, 2016, 7:15 a.m., Andreas Hansson wrote:
> > I see how this works as a stop gap, but ultimately I would like to push for
> > the removal of the shadow memory as the first option. Is it really that
> > much effort?
>
> David Hashe wrote:
> I'm not personally familiar enough
> On July 25, 2016, 3:32 p.m., Jason Lowe-Power wrote:
> > Nice to see ARM thinking about Ruby support! Should we enable some tests
> > for it now?
Not yet. This is still extremely experimental and there are a few known issues
with it. We have university partners looking at them, so this will
* build/ALPHA/tests/opt/quick/se/30.eio-mp/alpha/eio/simple-atomic-mp:
CHANGED!
* build/ALPHA/tests/opt/quick/se/20.eio-short/alpha/eio/simple-atomic:
CHANGED!
* build/ALPHA/tests/opt/quick/se/20.eio-short/alpha/eio/simple-timing:
CHANGED!
*
