----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/326/#review588 -----------------------------------------------------------
src/mem/protocol/MOESI_CMP_token-L1cache.sm <http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/326/#comment825> These functions that take multiple pointers just so the called function can test which one is valid are pretty unwieldy and also seem to cause a lot of redundant testing. Can we factor out the check so we have a single test to set one valid entry_ptr variable, then use that in all these calls? I see there are some similar calls in MOESI_CMP_directory too, though not as many. - Steve On 2010-12-31 17:33:04, Nilay Vaish wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/326/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated 2010-12-31 17:33:04) > > > Review request for Default. > > > Summary > ------- > > This request for reviewing the updates to implementation of the MOESI CMP > token protocol. These updates have been carried out so as to conform with the > changes made to CacheMemory and TBETable classes, and to SLICC. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/mem/protocol/MOESI_CMP_token-L1cache.sm UNKNOWN > src/mem/protocol/MOESI_CMP_token-L2cache.sm UNKNOWN > src/mem/protocol/MOESI_CMP_token-dir.sm UNKNOWN > > Diff: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/326/diff > > > Testing > ------- > > Changes have been tested using ruby_random_test.py for 1,000,000 loads and 20 > different seeds for random number generator. > > > Thanks, > > Nilay > >
_______________________________________________ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
