Hi all,
I (finally) finished rebasing and updating the changes based on the
feedback. Thank you all for your help on this!
On the to do list before merging:
- Some more comments that may need a bit of back and forth (especially from
Andreas as of 5/26)
- Run the nightly and weekly tests on the ti
Hi all,
I would really appreciate some reviews on these changes. This is something
that I know many in the development community (Andreas, Gabe, others) have
been asking for. Please take a look!
I think most changes are pretty straightforward. There is one change where
I would like some specific
Sounds like a good idea. But I don't know how to do this easily. All
SimObjects are part of the m5.object module, and this is deeply embedded in
many different parts of gem5.
My best guess at how to do this would be to add a new type of SimObject
which is not in m5.objects, but in a submodule. The
Congrats to Jason and to everyone who’s making this possible!
About the naming, I wonder if we could provide a different python module per
ruby protocol.
That would allow us to avoid prefixing in favour of something like:
$from m5.objects.mi_example import L1Cache_Controller
or
$from m5.object
Thanks, Brad!
I *hope* that the downstream work is minimal. There's only one change that
I couldn't figure out a way to make backwards compatible, and it's a very
minor update. BTW, if you have an idea on how to make it backwards
compatible, I'm open to revising. I tried a few different things, bu
[AMD Official Use Only]
Hi Jason,
This is a huge undertaking. I'm very impressed that you got this the work.
Congratulations!
Your email covers many important aspects of the change, but one item missing is
the motivation for the change. Is it primarily compilation simplicity? Now
one can
