You probably already realize this, but I want to point out that the topology needs pointers to all the controllers. I don't have the code in front of me, but if I recall correctly, topology is then a member of the network. If you move the controllers underneath RubySystem and if RubySystem keeps its pointer to the network, then a cycle exists.
Brad > -----Original Message----- > From: m5-dev-boun...@m5sim.org [mailto:m5-dev-boun...@m5sim.org] On > Behalf Of Steve Reinhardt > Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2011 9:32 PM > To: M5 Developer List > Subject: Re: [m5-dev] Functional Interface in Ruby > > On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 5:45 PM, Nilay Vaish <ni...@cs.wisc.edu> wrote: > > > On Sat, 12 Mar 2011, Steve Reinhardt wrote: > > > > Can't we loop through the directory controllers in python to > calculate the > >> total size, then pass that size as a parameter to RubySystem? > There's no > >> reason for the C++ RubySystem object to need the directory > controller > >> pointers just to do that calculation. > >> > >> > > It is being done in Python script. We were thinking of passing > RubySystem > > object to the Network. But RubySystem cannot be created before > directory > > controllers are created. And the reason for these changes is to pass > > RubySystem object to the controllers. > > > > I'm still confused... the python objects can be created in any order, > and > parameter values can be set at any time and in any order, up until the > instantiate() call. The acyclic dependency issue only affects the > creation > of C++ objects in instantiate(). So I don't see how this is relevant. > > > > I would like to access cache controllers from RubySystem parameter > object > > in C++. If we do allow such access, then we would not have any cycle > in the > > graph. We only need to create controllers, then network and then > RubySystem > > in Python. If controllers are visible to RubySystem as members of the > > RubySystem parameter object, then we can create the list of cache > memories > > by probing each controller object. > > > Yea, I can see that even though that's not the m5 idiom, and is a > little > less convenient since the python code has to explicitly build this list > instead of having it happen implicitly, that it fits better with the > way > RubySystem is currently built up. > > Steve > _______________________________________________ > m5-dev mailing list > m5-dev@m5sim.org > http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev _______________________________________________ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
