-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1895/#review4426
-----------------------------------------------------------
Are we relying on pkt->bus{First,Last}WordDelay to be a multiple of the cache
clock period? Of course that would normally be the case if the cache and bus
are on the same clock, and I'm sure there are many things we get wrong if
they're not, but it seems to be it would be safer to have those terms inside
the call to clockEdge() as well. Unless there's a good reason that they're
not... if so, please enlighten me.
- Steve Reinhardt
On June 4, 2013, 10:47 a.m., Andreas Hansson wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1895/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated June 4, 2013, 10:47 a.m.)
>
>
> Review request for Default.
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> Changeset 9745:58e6081c3e49
> ---------------------------
> mem: Align cache timing to clock edges
>
> This patch changes the cache timing calculations such that the results
> are aligned to clock edges.
>
> Plenty stats change as a results of this patch.
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> src/mem/cache/cache_impl.hh ea26ba576891
>
> Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/1895/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> All regressions pass after stats updates
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Andreas Hansson
>
>
_______________________________________________
gem5-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
