> On March 20, 2013, 2:31 a.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > All you interconnect-savvy people out there, any input on this one and > > http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1771/ would be appreciated.
If there are no objections I'll proceed and push this on Tuesday. - Andreas ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1770/#review4142 ----------------------------------------------------------- On March 14, 2013, 7:26 a.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1770/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated March 14, 2013, 7:26 a.m.) > > > Review request for Default. > > > Description > ------- > > Changeset 9588:babde3e3415c > --------------------------- > mem: Introduce a variable for the retrying port > > This patch introduces a variable to keep track of the retrying port > instead of relying on it being the front of the retryList. > > Besides the improvement in readability, this patch is a step towards > separating out the two cases where a port is waiting for the bus to be > free, and where the forwarding did not succeed and the bus is waiting > for a retry to pass on to the original initiator of the transaction. > > The changes made are currently such that the regressions are not > affected. This is ensured by always prioritizing the currently > retrying port and putting it back at the front of the retry list. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/mem/bus.hh 1a21964b7227 > src/mem/bus.cc 1a21964b7227 > > Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1770/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > All regressions pass > > > Thanks, > > Andreas Hansson > > _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
