On 2011-04-13 10:28:08, Brad Beckmann wrote:
src/mem/protocol/MESI_CMP_directory-L1cache.sm, line 141
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/diff/6/?file=11548#file11548line141
Why are you adding this function? SLICC already generates a similar
function: getPermission().
On 2011-04-13 10:28:08, Brad Beckmann wrote:
src/mem/protocol/MESI_CMP_directory-L1cache.sm, line 141
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/diff/6/?file=11548#file11548line141
Why are you adding this function? SLICC already generates a similar
function: getPermission().
On 2011-04-15 15:57:28, Steve Reinhardt wrote:
configs/example/ruby_mem_test.py, line 98
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/diff/8/?file=11625#file11625line98
You probably don't want to commit this value, do you? If you want to
hardwire a number, I'd pick something more reasonable
On 2011-04-13 10:28:08, Brad Beckmann wrote:
src/mem/protocol/MESI_CMP_directory-L1cache.sm, line 141
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/diff/6/?file=11548#file11548line141
Why are you adding this function? SLICC already generates a similar
function: getPermission().
On 2011-04-13 10:28:08, Brad Beckmann wrote:
src/mem/protocol/MESI_CMP_directory-L1cache.sm, line 141
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/diff/6/?file=11548#file11548line141
Why are you adding this function? SLICC already generates a similar
function: getPermission().
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/#review1130
---
Thanks for pointing these changes out. I didn't look at the Ruby stuff
...@m5sim.org]
On Behalf Of Nilay Vaish
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2011 4:39 PM
To: Default
Subject: Re: [m5-dev] Review Request: Ruby: Add support for functional
accesses
Brad, can you take a look at the patch? I think we are now in position to
implement functional accesses for the PioPort.
--
Nilay
On 2011-04-13 13:43:26, Gabe Black wrote:
Please fix these style issues, including the ones in this file I haven't
explicitly pointed out. You should be using M5 style generally, but
especially when your in M5 code. Also, please be sure to point this out to
one of the classic memory
On 2011-04-13 10:28:08, Brad Beckmann wrote:
src/mem/protocol/MESI_CMP_directory-L1cache.sm, line 141
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/diff/6/?file=11548#file11548line141
Why are you adding this function? SLICC already generates a similar
function: getPermission().
On 2011-04-13 10:28:08, Brad Beckmann wrote:
src/mem/protocol/MESI_CMP_directory-L1cache.sm, line 141
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/diff/6/?file=11548#file11548line141
Why are you adding this function? SLICC already generates a similar
function: getPermission().
you were looking for?
Brad
-Original Message-
From: m5-dev-boun...@m5sim.org [mailto:m5-dev-boun...@m5sim.org]
On Behalf Of Nilay Vaish
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 9:25 AM
To: M5 Developer List
Subject: Re: [m5-dev] Review Request: Ruby: Add support for functional
accesses
I just reviewed it. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Brad
-Original Message-
From: m5-dev-boun...@m5sim.org [mailto:m5-dev-boun...@m5sim.org]
On Behalf Of Nilay Vaish
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2011 4:39 PM
To: Default
Subject: Re: [m5-dev] Review Request: Ruby: Add
On 2011-04-13 10:28:08, Brad Beckmann wrote:
configs/example/ruby_mem_test.py, line 97
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/diff/6/?file=11542#file11542line97
It seems that the following three parameters should not be hardcoded,
but instead should be set using command line options.
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/
---
(Updated 2011-04-13 11:17:53.272247)
Review request for Default.
Summary
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/#review1113
---
Please fix these style issues, including the ones in this file I haven't
On 2011-03-31 22:08:21, Brad Beckmann wrote:
This looks great, I just have a few minor suggestions below.
It seems like the next step is to figure out how to deal with functional
accesses not succeeding in the CPUs and devices.
Nilay Vaish wrote:
Brad, I would make the changes
On 2011-04-03 13:45:28, Brad Beckmann wrote:
src/mem/ruby/system/DirectoryMemory.py, line 2
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/diff/4/?file=11465#file11465line2
Why are you deleting this file and where are you moving the current
functionality?
My bad! I had forgotten to add
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/
---
(Updated 2011-04-04 06:22:20.346203)
Review request for Default.
Summary
---
On 2011-03-31 22:08:21, Brad Beckmann wrote:
This looks great, I just have a few minor suggestions below.
It seems like the next step is to figure out how to deal with functional
accesses not succeeding in the CPUs and devices.
Nilay Vaish wrote:
Brad, I would make the changes
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/#review1090
---
src/mem/ruby/system/DirectoryMemory.py
On 2011-03-31 22:08:21, Brad Beckmann wrote:
This looks great, I just have a few minor suggestions below.
It seems like the next step is to figure out how to deal with functional
accesses not succeeding in the CPUs and devices.
Nilay Vaish wrote:
Brad, I would make the changes
On 2011-04-01 09:30:54, Brad Beckmann wrote:
Hi Nilay,
Comments below. I might be missing something, but the changes to
DirectoryMemory seem straightforward.
No, you are not missing anything. It is just that I had not implemented
it up till now.
- Nilay
On 2011-03-31 22:08:21, Brad Beckmann wrote:
src/mem/ruby/system/RubyPort.cc, line 417
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/diff/3/?file=11443#file11443line417
Are functional packets put on the stack or the heap? I seem to
remember the former, but I could be wrong.
In a couple of
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/
---
(Updated 2011-04-02 11:42:47.195024)
Review request for Default.
Summary
---
On 2011-03-31 22:08:21, Brad Beckmann wrote:
This looks great, I just have a few minor suggestions below.
It seems like the next step is to figure out how to deal with functional
accesses not succeeding in the CPUs and devices.
Brad, I would make the changes you have listed below. I
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/#review1085
---
Hi Nilay,
Comments below. I might be missing something, but the
On 2011-03-31 11:11:03, Brad Beckmann wrote:
src/mem/ruby/system/RubyPort.cc, line 321
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/diff/2/?file=11382#file11382line321
This loop is probably the most complicated and important part of this
patch. It might be easiest if we move this
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/#review1054
---
Hi Nilay,
First, thanks for your patience. Sorry I wasn't able to
On 2011-03-31 11:11:03, Brad Beckmann wrote:
src/mem/ruby/system/RubyPort.cc, line 321
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/diff/2/?file=11382#file11382line321
This loop is probably the most complicated and important part of this
patch. It might be easiest if we move this
On 2011-03-31 11:11:03, Brad Beckmann wrote:
src/mem/ruby/system/RubyPort.cc, line 321
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/diff/2/?file=11382#file11382line321
This loop is probably the most complicated and important part of this
patch. It might be easiest if we move this
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/
---
(Updated 2011-03-31 20:44:17.499794)
Review request for Default.
Summary
---
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/#review1082
---
This looks great, I just have a few minor suggestions below.
It seems
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/
---
(Updated 2011-03-30 16:19:26.551926)
Review request for Default.
Summary
---
On Tue, 29 Mar 2011, Nilay Vaish wrote:
Brad, I have posted on the review board my current implementation for
supporting functional accesses in Ruby. This is untested and is mainly meant
for furthering the discussions. I have some questions for you --
1. How do we inform the other end of
-dev] Review Request: Ruby: Add support for functional
accesses
On Tue, 29 Mar 2011, Nilay Vaish wrote:
Brad, I have posted on the review board my current implementation for
supporting functional accesses in Ruby. This is untested and is mainly
meant for furthering the discussions. I
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/611/
---
Review request for Default.
Summary
---
Ruby: Add support for functional
Brad, I have posted on the review board my current implementation for
supporting functional accesses in Ruby. This is untested and is mainly
meant for furthering the discussions. I have some questions for you --
1. How do we inform the other end of RubyPort's M5 Port about whether or
not
37 matches
Mail list logo
