changes to src/mem files for energy/delay calculations changes to configs/common/* to allow modified configurations in FS mode new power files in src/power to integrate wattch
Currently I can do 'hg view' to see a list of all changes as an ADG and then rollback if I want using 'hg revert' or commit new changes using 'hg commit'. Do you think mq would be better? ----- Original Message ----- From: "nathan binkert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "M5 users mailing list" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 8:13 PM Subject: Re: [m5-users] Difference between using hg and mq > Well, all of the m5 developers use mq. What sorts of changes are you > making? > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 5:06 PM, Sujay Phadke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hi Nate, >> Thanks for replying. Well for the present I am using hg itself and >> making my own changes to the source. I commit them using hg commit. I >> have a >> custom emacs merge file which makes merging easy in case the source repo >> changes. I think this works good for now. I do fold the changes back >> using >> hg. I really didnt hear back from anyone about their experience so I dont >> know if taking the mq approach is better. >> >> - Sujay >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "nathan binkert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "M5 users mailing list" <[email protected]> >> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 6:01 PM >> Subject: Re: [m5-users] Difference between using hg and mq >> >> >>> Did you get anywhere with this? You should really look at the >>> mercurial documentation. The choice depends on the usage. If you're >>> planning on making massive changes across the board and don't plan to >>> integrate them, then hg itself probably makes sense. If you want to >>> fold your changes back into the tree eventually as patches, or you >>> have smallish changes that you'd like to benefit from our >>> improvements, mq probably makes the most sense. >>> >>> If you're creating completely new models, then using EXTRAS with stuff >>> in your own repository is probably the way to go. >>> >>> We'd encourage people to try to fold stuff back into M5 as we do, so >>> we lean towards mq which is probably the best way to go for that. I >>> have HP stuff that is private to HP that I do with a separate >>> repository and the EXTRAS thing. >>> >>> Nate >>> >>> On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 9:25 AM, Sujay Phadke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> I read the M5 repo documentation and the hgbook on using hg and >>>> mq. >>>> I >>>> am confused between which approach I should be using for making my own >>>> changes to m5-stable. One way is to make my changes and use the hg >>>> commit. I >>>> can pull changes to the source using hg fetch and it does a 3-way merge >>>> when >>>> required. >>>> >>>> The other way is to use the 'q' commands - qinit, qnew, qrefresh, etc. >>>> Could >>>> someone elaborate whats the best way to go about it? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Sujay >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> m5-users mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> m5-users mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> m5-users mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users >> >> > _______________________________________________ > m5-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users > _______________________________________________ m5-users mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m5-users
