[gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5

Hi Boris, Gabe, I've just uploaded patchset 4 with these changes: [1] switch back to the use of INTREG_* for the special-purpose registers https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/public/gem5/+/40882/ [2] rebase on top of the latest "develop" branch [3] use of arch/power/regs/*.h as a result

[gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5

ilto:gem5-dev@gem5.org>> > wrote: - > To: "Boris Shingarov" mailto:shinga...@labware.com>> > From: "Sandipan Das via gem5-dev" <mailto:gem5-dev@gem5.org>> > Date: 04/19/2021 09:09AM > Cc: "gem5 Developer List" mailto:gem5-dev

[gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5

Perfect.In accord with the latest email from Jason, I created GEM5-959:https://gem5.atlassian.net/browse/GEM5-959but I left the "Assignee" field blank as I will leave the choice to you whether you prefer to have your or my name in that field.-"Sandipan Das via gem5-dev"

[gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5

Hi Boris, On 14/04/21 11:43 pm, Boris Shingarov wrote: > Hi Sandipan, > > I notice some of the commits (which were, if not blocking reviewing other > commits, but at least making comprehension of the whole body of commits > harder > for me) are ready for merge, for example >

[gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5

Hi Sandipan,I notice some of the commits (which were, if not blocking reviewing other commits, but at least making comprehension of the whole body of commits harder for me) are ready for merge, for examplehttps://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/public/gem5/+/42943Do you want to start merging (what

[gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5

You can go ahead, Sandipan. Since my series has fairly broad impact, I'm thinking I'll wait until after the release to check it in. Gabe On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 12:08 AM Sandipan Das wrote: > Hi Gabe, > > On 25/02/21 1:10 pm, Gabe Black wrote: > > Hi Sandipan. You are correct, except that I

[gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5

Hi Gabe, On 25/02/21 1:10 pm, Gabe Black wrote: > Hi Sandipan. You are correct, except that I would say you don't need to > force push, just regular push. If I were at the head of a branch I wanted > to (re)upload to gerrit, I would run: > > git push origin HEAD:refs/for/develop > > Gerrit will

[gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5

Hi Sandipan. You are correct, except that I would say you don't need to force push, just regular push. If I were at the head of a branch I wanted to (re)upload to gerrit, I would run: git push origin HEAD:refs/for/develop Gerrit will look at the Change-Id field in the commit message and use that

[gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5

Hello Boris, Gabe, I think I now have a good amount of changes to address from the initial posting of the patch series. In case of mailing list based reviews, we would typically post the whole series again with a V2 tag but I guess Gerrit tracks changes based on Change-Id. So as long as the

[gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5

Wow! Thanks for all of the work here! It's cool to see all of the excitement around POWER support! Just to be clear, because I think it was a little ambiguous in other conversations, I'm very supportive of improving the POWER support in gem5 given that there are a significant number of people who

[gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5

+CC: Luke On 08/02/21 10:26 am, Sandipan Das wrote: > Hello Boris, Gabe, > > I have rebased and pushed the changes to gerrit. > This is link to the first patch in the series: > https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/public/gem5/+/40880 > > ___

[gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5

Hello Gabe, On 08/02/21 10:58 am, Gabe Black wrote: > Thanks, I took a very quick pass through them, primarily looking for places > touched outside of the arch/power directory (where the impact is larger). > The only two things I saw were where you added an #if THE_ISA in the CPU > (not ok, has

[gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5

Thanks, I took a very quick pass through them, primarily looking for places touched outside of the arch/power directory (where the impact is larger). The only two things I saw were where you added an #if THE_ISA in the CPU (not ok, has to be handled differently), and adding some constants and

[gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5

Hello Boris, Gabe, I have rebased and pushed the changes to gerrit. This is link to the first patch in the series: https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/public/gem5/+/40880 - Sandipan ___ gem5-dev mailing list -- gem5-dev@gem5.org To unsubscribe send

[gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5

On 05/02/21 6:06 pm, Gabe Black wrote: > Re my commit, please feel free to add back the constants you need. I'm > probably going to try splitting up the ISA constants consumed by non-ISA > code from the ones that are internally used in registers.hh since I'm > trying to get rid of the former,

[gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5

Re my commit, please feel free to add back the constants you need. I'm probably going to try splitting up the ISA constants consumed by non-ISA code from the ones that are internally used in registers.hh since I'm trying to get rid of the former, but if that same constant is useful *inside* an ISA

[gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5

Hello Boris, On 04/02/21 10:08 pm, Boris Shingarov wrote: > > The current sequence breaks 32-bit support in > > the beginning and then restores it back towards the end. > > Wondering if that could be a problem with the CI? > > I would be surprised if there is even any POWER-specific CI at

[gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5

> The current sequence breaks 32-bit support in> the beginning and then restores it back towards the end.> Wondering if that could be a problem with the CI?I would be surprised if there is even any POWER-specific CI at all.The one POWER binary we had (in test-progs), was removed at c1ebdf66f. 

[gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5

Hello Boris, On 04/02/21 12:43 am, Boris Shingarov wrote: >> I think I had come across that problem too but I am sure >> that one of my patches will fix that. Probably this one > > Yes -- that's what I meant by "commits related to 3dd04381". > So, let's start with this small area. > Sure. >>

[gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5

a...@nitk.edu.in, "Pratik Rajesh Sampat" , "Kajol Jain" , "Gautham R. Shenoy" , "gem5 Developer List" Subject: Re: [gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5 Hello Boris, On 03/02/21 2:34 am, Boris Shingarov wrote: > Hi Sandipan, > >> This makes it

[gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5

On 03/02/21 11:59 pm, Sandipan Das wrote: > Hello Boris, > > On 03/02/21 2:34 am, Boris Shingarov wrote: >> Hi Sandipan, >> >>> This makes it possible >>> to run both 32-bit and 64-bit big and little endian PowerPC binaries >>> in SE mode. If its okay with you, we can start by working on

[gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5

Hello Boris, On 03/02/21 2:34 am, Boris Shingarov wrote: > Hi Sandipan, > >> This makes it possible >> to run both 32-bit and 64-bit big and little endian PowerPC binaries >> in SE mode. If its okay with you, we can start by working on trying to >> get these changes reviewed and merged first. >

[gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5

dev" Date: 02/02/2021 01:51AM Cc: gem5-dev@gem5.org, basava...@nitk.edu.in, "Pratik Rajesh Sampat" , "Kajol Jain" , "Gautham R. Shenoy" , "Sandipan Das" Subject: [gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5 Hello Boris, On 02/02/21 12:16 am, Boris Shingaro

[gem5-dev] Re: Upstreaming power-gem5

Hello Boris, On 02/02/21 12:16 am, Boris Shingarov wrote: > Dear Basavaraj, Sandipan and other contributors to power-gem5: > > I am currently the maintainer of arch-power in gem5 and I am interested in > upstreaming power-gem5 to the mainline gem5. My understanding from your Glad to hear