> On Sept. 1, 2016, 3:33 p.m., Jason Lowe-Power wrote:
> > What testing did you perform to make sure all of the protocols were
> > modified correctly?
> >
> > Most of these changes seem reasonable to me, but I know from experience
> > that even when the SLICC changes seem like they are right,
> On Sept. 1, 2016, 3:33 p.m., Jason Lowe-Power wrote:
> > What testing did you perform to make sure all of the protocols were
> > modified correctly?
> >
> > Most of these changes seem reasonable to me, but I know from experience
> > that even when the SLICC changes seem like they are right,
> On Sept. 1, 2016, 3:33 p.m., Jason Lowe-Power wrote:
> > What testing did you perform to make sure all of the protocols were
> > modified correctly?
> >
> > Most of these changes seem reasonable to me, but I know from experience
> > that even when the SLICC changes seem like they are right,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3600/#review8702
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Joe Gross
On Aug. 11, 2016, 4:08 a.m., Curtis
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3599/#review8701
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Joe Gross
On Aug. 11, 2016, 4:07 a.m., Curtis
> On Sept. 1, 2016, 3:33 p.m., Jason Lowe-Power wrote:
> > What testing did you perform to make sure all of the protocols were
> > modified correctly?
> >
> > Most of these changes seem reasonable to me, but I know from experience
> > that even when the SLICC changes seem like they are right,
> On Sept. 1, 2016, 3:33 p.m., Jason Lowe-Power wrote:
> > What testing did you perform to make sure all of the protocols were
> > modified correctly?
> >
> > Most of these changes seem reasonable to me, but I know from experience
> > that even when the SLICC changes seem like they are right,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3591/#review8698
---
What testing did you perform to make sure all of the protocols were
* build/ALPHA/tests/opt/quick/se/00.hello/alpha/linux/o3-timing: passed.
* build/ALPHA/tests/opt/quick/se/00.hello/alpha/linux/simple-timing-ruby:
passed.
* build/ALPHA/tests/opt/quick/se/00.hello/alpha/linux/minor-timing: passed.
*
> On Aug. 31, 2016, 5:04 p.m., Michael LeBeane wrote:
> > Any more comments on this? We would like to get a few more ship it's since
> > this fairly large and will break checkpoints.
If it breaks checkpoints there should be an update function added, or am I
missing something?
- Andreas
10 matches
Mail list logo