Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 2861: sim: Refactor the serialization base class

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2861/ --- (Updated July 6, 2015, 5:15 p.m.) Review request for Default. Repository: gem5

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 2861: sim: Refactor the serialization base class

> On July 4, 2015, 8:15 p.m., Steve Reinhardt wrote: > > src/sim/serialize.hh, line 337 > > > > > > Is there a plan in place to change the objects that use this? If not > > (i.e., if there's a legitimate need for some objec

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 2861: sim: Refactor the serialization base class

> On July 4, 2015, 12:15 p.m., Steve Reinhardt wrote: > > src/sim/serialize.hh, line 337 > > > > > > Is there a plan in place to change the objects that use this? If not > > (i.e., if there's a legitimate need for some obje

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 2861: sim: Refactor the serialization base class

> On July 4, 2015, 8:15 p.m., Steve Reinhardt wrote: > > src/sim/serialize.hh, line 337 > > > > > > Is there a plan in place to change the objects that use this? If not > > (i.e., if there's a legitimate need for some objec

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 2861: sim: Refactor the serialization base class

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2861/#review6707 --- src/sim/serialize.hh (line 332)

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 2861: sim: Refactor the serialization base class

> On June 8, 2015, 2:47 p.m., Joel Hestness wrote: > > I like that this aims to remove some of the less common checkpoint writing > > functions. This is a useful step, and I'm largely ok with this change. > > > > I've always wondered why we don't explicitly pass Checkpoint to both > > serializ

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 2861: sim: Refactor the serialization base class

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2861/#review6479 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Joel Hestness On May 28, 2015, 5:35 p.m., Andreas

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 2861: sim: Refactor the serialization base class

> On June 8, 2015, 3:47 p.m., Joel Hestness wrote: > > I like that this aims to remove some of the less common checkpoint writing > > functions. This is a useful step, and I'm largely ok with this change. > > > > I've always wondered why we don't explicitly pass Checkpoint to both > > serializ

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 2861: sim: Refactor the serialization base class

> On June 8, 2015, 2:47 p.m., Joel Hestness wrote: > > I like that this aims to remove some of the less common checkpoint writing > > functions. This is a useful step, and I'm largely ok with this change. > > > > I've always wondered why we don't explicitly pass Checkpoint to both > > serializ

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 2861: sim: Refactor the serialization base class

> On June 8, 2015, 3:47 p.m., Joel Hestness wrote: > > I like that this aims to remove some of the less common checkpoint writing > > functions. This is a useful step, and I'm largely ok with this change. > > > > I've always wondered why we don't explicitly pass Checkpoint to both > > serializ

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 2861: sim: Refactor the serialization base class

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2861/#review6474 --- I like that this aims to remove some of the less common checkpoint writin

[gem5-dev] Review Request 2861: sim: Refactor the serialization base class

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2861/ --- Review request for Default. Repository: gem5 Description --- Changeset 10854