On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 10:30 PM, nathan binkert n...@binkert.org wrote:
I've long thought that it would be nice if we could have multi step
init/startup. The basic way to do it is to have init() return a bool.
If it's true, then that object should have init called again in a
second round.
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 10:48 PM, Gabe Black gbl...@eecs.umich.edu wrote:
The entire SimObject startup process has always been a little mysterious
to me as far as what all the steps are and what they're for, and it
sounds like it's getting more complicated. For those of us that don't
already
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 8:50 PM, Steve Reinhardt ste...@gmail.com wrote:
RIght now we have the following phases for initializing SimObjects:
1. user script calls instantiate()
a. call constructors
b. connect ports
c. call init()
2. user script optionally calls restoreCheckpoint()
a.
On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 06:39:10 -0700, Steve Reinhardt ste...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 8:50 PM, Steve Reinhardt ste...@gmail.com
wrote:
RIght now we have the following phases for initializing SimObjects:
1. user script calls instantiate()
a. call constructors
b. connect
Stepping back a bit, part of the complexity stems from the interface
between the user's simulation script and the core code: when you call
instantiate(), there's no indication whether or not you'll be
restoring from a checkpoint, so we have to wait for the call to
simulate() to do the
I've long thought that it would be nice if we could have multi step
init/startup. The basic way to do it is to have init() return a bool.
If it's true, then that object should have init called again in a
second round. (Same goes for startup()). The only question is if we
want to have init
nathan binkert wrote:
Stepping back a bit, part of the complexity stems from the interface
between the user's simulation script and the core code: when you call
instantiate(), there's no indication whether or not you'll be
restoring from a checkpoint, so we have to wait for the call to
I think that this is pretty elegant and won't confuse people unfamiliar
with the initialization. As far as Nate's idea goes, I would want to see
concrete cases where that is useful. It seems to increase
complexity/confusing code and I don't know what it buys us. Flexibility is
great, but
I have updated garnet to match M5's coding style.
Nate has already gone through it and approved the changes.
Please let me know if anyone has any concerns.
I will check the patch into the repository in a couple of days.
We are working on installing reviewboard on our machines, and will send
Steve Reinhardt wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 10:48 PM, Gabe Black gbl...@eecs.umich.edu wrote:
The entire SimObject startup process has always been a little mysterious
to me as far as what all the steps are and what they're for, and it
sounds like it's getting more complicated. For those
changeset 957eb55da9de in /z/repo/m5
details: http://repo.m5sim.org/m5?cmd=changeset;node=957eb55da9de
description:
inorder: squash from memory stall
this applies to multithreading models which would like to squash a
thread on memory stall
diffstat:
changeset 207e034f6bb2 in /z/repo/m5
details: http://repo.m5sim.org/m5?cmd=changeset;node=207e034f6bb2
description:
inorder: exe_unit_stats for resolved branches
diffstat:
src/cpu/inorder/resources/execution_unit.cc | 16
src/cpu/inorder/resources/execution_unit.hh |
changeset 97bb8e7068d3 in /z/repo/m5
details: http://repo.m5sim.org/m5?cmd=changeset;node=97bb8e7068d3
description:
inorder: enforce 78-character rule
diffstat:
src/cpu/inorder/cpu.cc| 19 +-
src/cpu/inorder/cpu.hh|4 +-
changeset 69d054e9e61c in /z/repo/m5
details: http://repo.m5sim.org/m5?cmd=changeset;node=69d054e9e61c
description:
inorder: cleanup virtual functions
remove the annotation 'virtual' from function declaration that isnt
being derived from
diffstat:
src/cpu/inorder/cpu.hh
changeset 1b1f8f32fe86 in /z/repo/m5
details: http://repo.m5sim.org/m5?cmd=changeset;node=1b1f8f32fe86
description:
inorder: update regressions
diffstat:
tests/long/50.vortex/ref/alpha/tru64/inorder-timing/simout| 6 +++---
1) I like the idea of putting the init sequence onto the wiki (but including
the call to regStats, which isn't there now because it's not relevant to
this conversation, but would still be helpful).
2) I like the idea of parameterizing instantiate with a checkpoint or not
and then having init()
This message is mostly to Lisa since she's done some stats cleanup
recently, but anyone who has used statistics other than Scalar and
Vector should feel free to comment.
I'm doing further cleanup and I'd like to know, which stats do you
use? Do you use AverageDeviation (it's broken)? Should I
17 matches
Mail list logo
