----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1432/#review3510 -----------------------------------------------------------
Just for my understanding, can you present what was happening earlier, what will happen with this patch in the clock example that you have provided? - Nilay Vaish On Sept. 21, 2012, 9:05 a.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1432/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Sept. 21, 2012, 9:05 a.m.) > > > Review request for Default. > > > Description > ------- > > This patch modifies how proxies are traversed and unproxied to allow > chained proxies. The issue that is solved manifested itself when a > proxy during its evaluation ended up being hitting another proxy, and > the second one got evaluated using the object that was originally used > for the first proxy. > > For a more tangible example, see the following patch on making the > default clock being inherited from the parent. In this patch, the CPU > clock is a proxy Parent.clock, which is overridden in the system to be > an actual value. This all works fine, but the AlphaLinuxSystem has a > boot_cpu_frequency parameter that is Self.cpu[0].clock.frequency. When > the latter is evaluated, it all happens relative to the current object > of the proxy, i.e. the system. Thus the cpu.clock is evaluated as > Parent.clock, but using the system rather than the cpu as the object > to enquire. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/python/m5/proxy.py 7d506c3ef13d > > Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1432/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > util/regress all passing (disregarding t1000 and eio) > > > Thanks, > > Andreas Hansson > > _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
