> On Jan. 7, 2016, 11:14 p.m., Steve Reinhardt wrote: > > Why was this patch committed? There are no ship-its, and there was no > > warning. I was complaining about minor things to buy myself a little time, > > and also because I hoped the changes between the similar files would be > > easier to detect/review if rename was used. I saw the updates on > > reviewboard and made a mental note that now I need to go back and > > re-review, and then next thing I know I see the changeset messages going > > by...
Hi Steve, I committed it because of this comment you made on this RB: "Given that it's clearly an improvement over the status quo (since it includes input from pd-gem5) I don't have a problem with committing first and addressing any issues I run across later, once the style issues are addressed." Our documentation says (http://gem5.org/Submitting_Contributions): "If your patch has been on reviewboard for a while without getting any reviews (or re-revires after you've posted changes), please email the gem5-dev list. If you have commit access, it is fair to give warning via email that you intend to commit the changes at some future date (e.g., a week out from the date of the email) if you do not hear any objections. Please do not simply commit a patch without giving warning on the gem5-dev list." I did precisely this; I made a plea for further review on the list on December 10, stating a desire to commit on December 18, and this was the only feedback I received, and to reiterate, the feedback we did get didn't sound much like an objection. - Curtis ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3228/#review7830 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Jan. 7, 2016, 9:58 p.m., Curtis Dunham wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3228/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Jan. 7, 2016, 9:58 p.m.) > > > Review request for Default. > > > Repository: gem5 > > > Description > ------- > > Distributed gem5 is the result of the convergence effort between multi-gem5 > and pd-gem5 (from Univ. of Wisconsin). It relies on the base multi-gem5 > infrastructure for packet forwarding, synchronisation and checkpointing but > combines those with the elaborated network switch model from pd-gem5. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/dev/net/Ethernet.py 57c340f947c719a5acc3867037d51829c3967671 > src/dev/net/SConscript 57c340f947c719a5acc3867037d51829c3967671 > src/dev/net/etherpkt.hh 57c340f947c719a5acc3867037d51829c3967671 > src/dev/net/etherpkt.cc 57c340f947c719a5acc3867037d51829c3967671 > src/dev/net/multi_etherlink.hh 57c340f947c719a5acc3867037d51829c3967671 > src/dev/net/multi_etherlink.cc 57c340f947c719a5acc3867037d51829c3967671 > src/dev/net/multi_iface.hh 57c340f947c719a5acc3867037d51829c3967671 > src/dev/net/multi_iface.cc 57c340f947c719a5acc3867037d51829c3967671 > src/dev/net/multi_packet.hh 57c340f947c719a5acc3867037d51829c3967671 > src/dev/net/multi_packet.cc 57c340f947c719a5acc3867037d51829c3967671 > src/dev/net/tcp_iface.hh 57c340f947c719a5acc3867037d51829c3967671 > src/dev/net/tcp_iface.cc 57c340f947c719a5acc3867037d51829c3967671 > src/sim/global_event.hh 57c340f947c719a5acc3867037d51829c3967671 > src/sim/initparam_keys.hh PRE-CREATION > src/sim/pseudo_inst.cc 57c340f947c719a5acc3867037d51829c3967671 > util/multi/Makefile 57c340f947c719a5acc3867037d51829c3967671 > util/multi/tcp_server.hh 57c340f947c719a5acc3867037d51829c3967671 > util/multi/tcp_server.cc 57c340f947c719a5acc3867037d51829c3967671 > > Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3228/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Curtis Dunham > > _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
