[gem5-dev] changeset in m5: orion: bug fix in link power, and some reorg

changeset 681497e0356b in /z/repo/m5 details: http://repo.m5sim.org/m5?cmd=changeset;node=681497e0356b description: orion: bug fix in link power, and some reorg diffstat: src/mem/ruby/network/garnet/fixed-pipeline/GarnetNetwork_d.cc | 3 + src/mem/ruby/network/garnet/fixed-pipeline/Rou

[gem5-dev] changeset in m5: garnet: added network ptr to links to be used b...

changeset 24a00a6d5992 in /z/repo/m5 details: http://repo.m5sim.org/m5?cmd=changeset;node=24a00a6d5992 description: garnet: added network ptr to links to be used by orion diffstat: src/mem/ruby/network/garnet/fixed-pipeline/GarnetNetwork_d.cc | 7 +++ src/mem/ruby/network/garnet/fix

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request: Ruby: Convert to M5 Stats

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/704/#review1292 --- src/mem/ruby/profiler/Profiler.hh

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request: Ruby: Convert to M5 Stats

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/704/#review1291 --- I apologize it took me a while to review this code. Overall, my major co

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request: orion: bug fix in link power, and some reorg

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/712/#review1290 --- Ship it! - Brad On 2011-05-23 18:40:06, Tushar Krishna wrote: > > ---

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request: garnet: add network ptr to links

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/711/#review1289 --- Ship it! - Brad On 2011-05-23 18:37:49, Tushar Krishna wrote: > > ---

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request: ISA parser: Simplify operand type handling.

On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Gabe Black wrote: > On 05/30/11 09:47, Steve Reinhardt wrote: >> >> Anyway, it seems very odd to have to say "(int8_t)Mem.ub" when we already >> have a ".sb" operand type defined as "int8_t".  It seems like a weird hidden >> restriction to say that there are oper

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request: ISA parser: Allow defining operand types with a ctype directly.

> On 2011-05-28 22:04:00, Steve Reinhardt wrote: > > This looks fine to me, but I'm confused... don't you delete this code > > completely two patches from now? Why bother changing it if you're going to > > get rid of it? > > Gabe Black wrote: > Because this way both are available, and the

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request: ISA parser: Allow defining operand types with a ctype directly.

> On 2011-05-28 22:04:00, Steve Reinhardt wrote: > > This looks fine to me, but I'm confused... don't you delete this code > > completely two patches from now? Why bother changing it if you're going to > > get rid of it? > > Gabe Black wrote: > Because this way both are available, and the

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request: ISA parser: Simplify operand type handling.

On 05/30/11 09:47, Steve Reinhardt wrote: > >> On 2011-05-28 21:58:27, Steve Reinhardt wrote: >>> The description is a little general; can you be more specific about what >>> this change is doing? I see that you're getting rid of the size from the >>> memory access operands and encoding that in

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request: ISA parser: Allow defining operand types with a ctype directly.

> On 2011-05-28 22:04:00, Steve Reinhardt wrote: > > This looks fine to me, but I'm confused... don't you delete this code > > completely two patches from now? Why bother changing it if you're going to > > get rid of it? > > Gabe Black wrote: > Because this way both are available, and the

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request: ISA parser: Simplify operand type handling.

> On 2011-05-28 21:58:27, Steve Reinhardt wrote: > > The description is a little general; can you be more specific about what > > this change is doing? I see that you're getting rid of the size from the > > memory access operands and encoding that in the ctype instead, which seems > > fine.

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request: ISA parser: Allow defining operand types with a ctype directly.

> On 2011-05-28 22:04:00, Steve Reinhardt wrote: > > This looks fine to me, but I'm confused... don't you delete this code > > completely two patches from now? Why bother changing it if you're going to > > get rid of it? > > Gabe Black wrote: > Because this way both are available, and the

[gem5-dev] Cron /z/m5/regression/do-regression quick

* build/ALPHA_SE/tests/opt/quick/00.hello/alpha/linux/simple-timing passed. * build/ALPHA_SE/tests/opt/quick/00.hello/alpha/tru64/simple-timing passed. * build/ALPHA_SE/tests/opt/quick/00.hello/alpha/linux/o3-timing passed. * build/ALPHA_SE/tests/opt/quick/20.eio-short/alpha/eio/sim

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request: ISA parser: Simplify operand type handling.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/655/ --- (Updated 2011-05-30 00:18:31.344077) Review request for Default, Ali Saidi, Gabe Bl