Steve Reinhardt wrote: > On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 10:23 PM, Gabe Black<gbl...@eecs.umich.edu> wrote: > >> We could also add a command line argument to the script. One thing to >> note is that I think se.py is supposed to just be an example. I have the >> impression it's often used exactly as is though, so that may not be a >> valid way to look at it. >> > > You're right... it's supposed to be an example but most people seem to > use it as is (or with minimal hacking). > > I think what Korey's done is fine: the CPU model itself makes sure the > workload length and the thread count are consistent, but the script > makes life easier for people in the common case where you just want > the thread count to scale with the workload. >
Ok. > It did seem to break the regressions though, which is not good... > I seem to have broken the regressions as well due to a difference in what gcc 4.1 and 4.2 will complain about. I just pushed a fix and hopefully SPARC_SE should start running again. Gabe _______________________________________________ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
