> On 2011-03-14 15:54:41, Brad Beckmann wrote:
> > Hi Somayeh,
I just have one larger issue to mention, then a few minor comments. See below
for details. The larger issue is that I believe one of the transitions you
specify is unecessary (see specific comments below). In general, be very
careful about stalling the forwarded request queue. That usually leads to
deadlock.
To answer your questions: Yes, it does not make sense for the flush requests
to return data. However, I don't think you want to add a new hitCallback
function just for flushes. Instead, it seems that if you set the data pointer
to null, then Ruby won't actually do any data updates. Subsequently, the
function RubyPort::M5Port::hitCallback should add a condition that says if a
flush request, set accessPhysMem to false. Make sense? Finally, yes please
update Check.cc to not deal with data. Flush reqeusts should not replace
Checks (i.e. reads). Instead they should be inserted randomly into the request
stream.
Once you make those changes, please post your next patch. I suspect that will
be your final round of updates.
Hi Brad,
Thanks for the comments!
As you have pointed, the transition(MI_F, {Other_GETX,...) should not happen,
and actually it does not happen. I removed it and tested the updated code.
Your suggestion on flush requests makes sense to me, I have started working on
that.
Somayeh
- Somayeh
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/552/#review958
-----------------------------------------------------------
On 2011-03-13 19:50:32, Somayeh Sardashti wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/552/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated 2011-03-13 19:50:32)
>
>
> Review request for Default and Brad Beckmann.
>
>
> Summary
> -------
>
> my initial implementation of cache flushing
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> src/cpu/testers/rubytest/Check.hh baf4b5f6782e
> src/cpu/testers/rubytest/Check.cc baf4b5f6782e
> src/mem/packet.hh baf4b5f6782e
> src/mem/packet.cc baf4b5f6782e
> src/mem/protocol/MOESI_hammer-cache.sm baf4b5f6782e
> src/mem/protocol/MOESI_hammer-dir.sm baf4b5f6782e
> src/mem/protocol/MOESI_hammer-msg.sm baf4b5f6782e
> src/mem/protocol/RubySlicc_Exports.sm baf4b5f6782e
> src/mem/protocol/RubySlicc_Types.sm baf4b5f6782e
> src/mem/ruby/slicc_interface/RubyRequest.hh baf4b5f6782e
> src/mem/ruby/slicc_interface/RubyRequest.cc baf4b5f6782e
> src/mem/ruby/system/DMASequencer.cc baf4b5f6782e
> src/mem/ruby/system/RubyPort.cc baf4b5f6782e
> src/mem/ruby/system/Sequencer.hh baf4b5f6782e
> src/mem/ruby/system/Sequencer.cc baf4b5f6782e
>
> Diff: http://reviews.m5sim.org/r/552/diff
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> This implementation has passed 10,000,000 ruby test cases, and the
> MOESI_hammer regression tests.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Somayeh
>
>
_______________________________________________
m5-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
