Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3083: ruby: slicc: remove nextLineHack from Type.py

> On Sept. 2, 2015, 7:41 p.m., Jason Power wrote: > > Do you know what this was used for? I've never encountered this, but it > > probably had a good reason to be there at some point... > > Nilay Vaish wrote: > None of the current protocols use it. The line has seen not any changes >

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3014: ruby: set: reimplement using std::bitset

> On Aug. 17, 2015, 2:37 p.m., Jieming Yin wrote: > > src/mem/ruby/common/NetDest.cc, line 113 > > > > > > m_bits[i].getSize() returns NUMBER_BITS_PER_SET, which is 64 for all > > machine types. In case of broadcast, all

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 2965: rename System.{hh, cc} to RubySystem.{hh, cc}

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2965/#review7107 --- Are they comments on this? We'd like to ship this soon. - Tony

[gem5-dev] Review Request 3089: cpu: Create record type enum for elastic traces

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3089/ --- Review request for Default. Repository: gem5 Description --- This patch

[gem5-dev] Review Request 3090: cpu: Support virtual addr in elastic traces

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3090/ --- Review request for Default. Repository: gem5 Description --- This patch

Re: [gem5-dev] On ReviewBoard: Elastic Traces

Hello again, RB30{89,90} have been added to this patch series. The original six haven't received any feedback in the last three weeks. We plan to move forward with these soon so have a look if you're interested. Thanks, Curtis Dunham -Original Message- From: Curtis Dunham Sent:

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3014: ruby: set: reimplement using std::bitset

I see. So it needs the bits in the set to identify which controllers to send to, and it can’t just send to all controllers? That is, the on-chip doesn’t have a list of all known controllers that it could use to identify where the messages should be sent? From: Nilay Vaish

[gem5-dev] changeset in gem5: Added tag stable_2015_09_03 for changeset 60e...

changeset bfc99bc87a79 in /z/repo/gem5 details: http://repo.gem5.org/gem5?cmd=changeset;node=bfc99bc87a79 description: Added tag stable_2015_09_03 for changeset 60eb3fef9c2d diffstat: .hgtags | 1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diffs (8 lines): diff -r

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 2965: rename System.{hh, cc} to RubySystem.{hh, cc}

We can do either hg mv, or hg rm and hg add. What is preferred? From: Nilay Vaish [mailto:nore...@gem5.org] On Behalf Of Nilay Vaish Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2015 1:51 PM To: Nilay Vaish; Gutierrez, Anthony; Hashe, David; Default Subject: Re: Review Request 2965: rename System.{hh,cc} to

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 2965: rename System.{hh, cc} to RubySystem.{hh, cc}

> On Sept. 3, 2015, 11:36 a.m., Tony Gutierrez wrote: > > Are they comments on this? We'd like to ship this soon. > > Nilay Vaish wrote: > Has hg mv been used to move those two files? We can do hg mv or hg rm/hg add. What is preferred? - Tony

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 2965: rename System.{hh, cc} to RubySystem.{hh, cc}

On Thu, 3 Sep 2015, Tony Gutierrez wrote: On Sept. 3, 2015, 11:36 a.m., Tony Gutierrez wrote: Are they comments on this? We'd like to ship this soon. Nilay Vaish wrote: Has hg mv been used to move those two files? We can do hg mv or hg rm/hg add. What is preferred? hg rm/hg add

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 2965: rename System.{hh, cc} to RubySystem.{hh, cc}

> On Sept. 3, 2015, 6:36 p.m., Tony Gutierrez wrote: > > Are they comments on this? We'd like to ship this soon. Has hg mv been used to move those two files? - Nilay --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:

[gem5-dev] Cron <m5test@zizzer> /z/m5/regression/do-regression quick

* build/ALPHA/tests/opt/quick/se/60.rubytest/alpha/linux/rubytest-ruby passed. * build/ALPHA/tests/opt/quick/se/30.eio-mp/alpha/eio/simple-atomic-mp passed. * build/ALPHA/tests/opt/quick/se/00.hello/alpha/tru64/simple-timing-ruby passed. *

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 2511: dev: cirrus: Add a simplified device model for the cirrus graphics device.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2511/#review7112 --- Rebased diff. - Gabe Black On Sept. 3, 2015, 10:26 p.m., Gabe Black

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 2511: dev: cirrus: Add a simplified device model for the cirrus graphics device.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2511/ --- (Updated Sept. 3, 2015, 10:26 p.m.) Review request for Default. Repository: gem5

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 2525: x86: Add a cirrus graphics adapter to x86 systems.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2525/#review7111 --- Rebased diff. - Gabe Black On Sept. 3, 2015, 10:25 p.m., Gabe Black

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 2525: x86: Add a cirrus graphics adapter to x86 systems.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2525/ --- (Updated Sept. 3, 2015, 10:25 p.m.) Review request for Default. Repository: gem5

Re: [gem5-dev] Updates to gem5-stable

On Wed, 5 Aug 2015, Joel Hestness wrote: Hi Nilay, One major concern is that we just pushed fixes for Ruby checkpointing to mainline (i.e. http://repo.gem5.org/gem5?cmd=changeset;node=72781d410e48). Tim Jones suggested that gem5 changeset 10524 was the origin of some checkpointing bugs, so

Re: [gem5-dev] Updates to gem5-stable

Ok! Some notes for the next update: I've been hammering changeset 11061:25b53a7195f7, and can confirm that it appears Ruby checkpoint and restore is working with timing and O3 CPUs, both with and without the Ruby backing store. Joel On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 3:44 PM, Nilay Vaish