> On June 7, 2013, 6:03 a.m., Nilay Vaish wrote: > > src/mem/comm_monitor.cc, line 223 > > <http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1896/diff/1/?file=35753#file35753line223> > > > > You are changing the behavior of the code here since expects_response > > and needsResponse are not equal in all cases.
This is indeed the case and hence the "fix" in the title. It would cause problems earlier if the monitor was placed between two caches. - Andreas ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1896/#review4406 ----------------------------------------------------------- On June 4, 2013, 10:49 a.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1896/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated June 4, 2013, 10:49 a.m.) > > > Review request for Default. > > > Description > ------- > > Changeset 9747:01d951b585ad > --------------------------- > mem: Fix CommMonitor style and response check > > This patch fixes the CommMonitor local variable names, and also > introduces a variable to capture if it expects to see a response. The > latter check considers both needsResponse and memInhibitAsserted. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/mem/comm_monitor.hh ea26ba576891 > src/mem/comm_monitor.cc ea26ba576891 > > Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1896/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > All regressions pass > > > Thanks, > > Andreas Hansson > > _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
