> On 2011-11-28 09:15:01, Andreas Hansson wrote: > > src/mem/packet.hh, line 278 > > <http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/915/diff/1/?file=15577#file15577line278> > > > > In most on-chip protocols there is a notion of beats (i.e. multiples of > > the physical word width) in a burst, and a mask of byte enables. The latter > > are usually per word and have to be the same for all beats, e.g. forming a > > burst of half words. > > > > Is this bytes_valid to be used similar to a burst length? In other > > words, is it always a multiple of the interface width? Is there a way to > > avoid the confusion? Would the problem with dynamic allocation go away if > > we introduced a maximum burst length?
This fix is for functional accesses so it doesn't need to be aware of the memory system architecture. Dynamic allocation is needed as the accesses can be any size when dealing with functional accesses. I'll try to think of something to remove any potential ambiguity with that variable name. - Geoffrey ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/915/#review1690 ----------------------------------------------------------- On 2011-11-28 09:05:53, Geoffrey Blake wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/915/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated 2011-11-28 09:05:53) > > > Review request for Default, Ali Saidi, Gabe Black, Steve Reinhardt, and > Nathan Binkert. > > > Summary > ------- > > Packet: Enable functional reads of partial data to packet class > > This patch fixes a long standing defficiency in the packet class where > it was unable to handle finding data that partially satisfied a request. > > This splits out changes made to the packet class in the checkercpu patch as > requested by Ali. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/mem/packet.hh 62dee0c98d53 > src/mem/packet.cc 62dee0c98d53 > > Diff: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/915/diff > > > Testing > ------- > > Compiles. No functional changes made from CheckerCPU patch to this patch for > packet class, and CheckerCPU fully exercised this code path during testing. > > > Thanks, > > Geoffrey > > _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
