> On May 24, 2016, 10 p.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > src/dev/net/etherswitch.cc, line 182 > > <http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3465/diff/7/?file=55548#file55548line182> > > > > all reschedule instead?
good point. Fixed. > On May 24, 2016, 10 p.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > src/dev/net/etherswitch.cc, line 347 > > <http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3465/diff/7/?file=55548#file55548line347> > > > > Does this break checkpoint compatibility? > > > > If so that needs to be addressed. It probably does. How should I address that? > On May 24, 2016, 10 p.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > src/dev/net/etherswitch.cc, line 93 > > <http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3465/diff/7/?file=55548#file55548line93> > > > > should this perhaps even be a warn (or do we ever expect this to happen > > in a correct setup? I would say It can happen in a correct setup. If someone set the fifo size of the ethernet switch smaller than MTU of ethernet packets then it would happen. But I can change it to warn if you think it's better. > On May 24, 2016, 10 p.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > src/dev/net/etherswitch.hh, line 147 > > <http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3465/diff/7/?file=55547#file55547line147> > > > > unsigned? if not it really needs a comment I added a comment. I used "int" intentionally. > On May 24, 2016, 10 p.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > src/dev/net/etherswitch.hh, line 108 > > <http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3465/diff/7/?file=55547#file55547line108> > > > > all these members could be const? I don't think so. We set them inside "EtherSwitch::Interface::PortFifoEntry::unserialize" - Mohammad ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3465/#review8336 ----------------------------------------------------------- On May 25, 2016, 3:50 a.m., Mohammad Alian wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3465/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated May 25, 2016, 3:50 a.m.) > > > Review request for Default. > > > Repository: gem5 > > > Description > ------- > > Changeset 11472:24da17267b22 > --------------------------- > dist, dev: Fixed the packet ordering in etherswitch > This patch fixes the order that packets gets pushed into the output fifo > of etherswitch. If two packets arrive at the same tick to the etherswitch, > we sort and push them based on their source port id. > In dist-gem5 simulations, if there is no ordering inforced while two > packets arrive at the same tick, it can lead to non-deterministic simulations > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/dev/net/etherswitch.hh 954d3014f7f0 > src/dev/net/etherswitch.cc 954d3014f7f0 > > Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3465/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Mohammad Alian > > _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
