> On Feb. 5, 2015, 8:25 a.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > src/mem/ruby/system/DMASequencer.hh, line 76 > > <http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2627/diff/1/?file=43428#file43428line76> > > > > Can we not get this through the sequencer rather?
I can make this change, if you want. But I was following the same format as is in the other Ruby ports (i.e. line 82 in RubyPort.hh). IMO, it's better to have consistency across similar objects than minimizing the code. > On Feb. 5, 2015, 8:25 a.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > src/mem/ruby/system/DMASequencer.cc, line 216 > > <http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2627/diff/1/?file=43429#file43429line216> > > > > Should this really be functional, or should it just be "access"? I can make this change. What is the difference between access() and functionalAccess()? When should one be used and not the other? I might have missed it, but I can't find any guide to this on the wiki or in the code. Also, do you want me to go back through and make this update in the RubyPort as well? > On Feb. 5, 2015, 8:25 a.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > src/mem/ruby/system/RubySystem.py, line 51 > > <http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2627/diff/1/?file=43431#file43431line51> > > > > I find the description rather misleading. > > > > In essence it is not the case of bypassing the interconnect, it is more > > a case of duplicating the memory, and ignoring the "normal" one. > > > > Thinking about it, why do we not just use the actual memory, but do so > > by faking it through system->getPhysMem().access(...) I've updated this description. I don't follow your last statement, though. - Jason ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2627/#review5828 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Feb. 4, 2015, 11:31 p.m., Jason Power wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2627/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Feb. 4, 2015, 11:31 p.m.) > > > Review request for Default. > > > Repository: gem5 > > > Description > ------- > > Changeset 10681:b2dc4aee1a0d > --------------------------- > Ruby: Update backing store option to propagate through to all RubyPorts > > Previously, the user would have to manually set access_backing_store=True > on all RubyPorts (Sequencers) in the config files. > Now, instead there is one global option that each RubyPort checks on > initialization. > > > Diffs > ----- > > configs/ruby/Ruby.py 7639c17357dc > src/mem/ruby/system/DMASequencer.hh 7639c17357dc > src/mem/ruby/system/DMASequencer.cc 7639c17357dc > src/mem/ruby/system/RubyPort.cc 7639c17357dc > src/mem/ruby/system/RubySystem.py 7639c17357dc > src/mem/ruby/system/Sequencer.py 7639c17357dc > src/mem/ruby/system/System.hh 7639c17357dc > src/mem/ruby/system/System.cc 7639c17357dc > > Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2627/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Jason Power > > _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
