Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On oct. 27, 2016, 12:11 après-midi, Andreas Hansson wrote: > > thanks for getting this in shape Hi all, Could someone commit this patch, please ? Thanks - Sophiane --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3502/#review8995 --- Ship it! thanks for getting this in shape - Andreas Hansson On Oct.

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3502/ --- (Updated Oct. 27, 2016, 11:25 a.m.) Review request for Default. Repository: gem5

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3502/#review8986 --- src/mem/cache/tags/base_set_assoc.hh (line 233)

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3502/ --- (Updated Oct. 25, 2016, 9:18 a.m.) Review request for Default. Repository: gem5

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On July 27, 2016, 4:52 p.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > src/mem/cache/tags/base_set_assoc.hh, line 228 > > > > > > Could you add a comment here? > > > > It seems to me this code is not right, as it checks if the

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On oct. 21, 2016, 1:29 après-midi, Pierre-Yves Péneau wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Someone can commit this patch ? I don't have right access on the > > repository, either Sophiane. > > Thank you. > > Jason Lowe-Power wrote: > Sorry we've been so slow on this patch. A couple of questions

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3502/ --- (Updated Oct. 24, 2016, 2:56 p.m.) Review request for Default. Repository: gem5

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On Oct. 21, 2016, 3:29 p.m., Pierre-Yves Péneau wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Someone can commit this patch ? I don't have right access on the > > repository, either Sophiane. > > Thank you. > > Jason Lowe-Power wrote: > Sorry we've been so slow on this patch. A couple of questions before I >

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On Oct. 21, 2016, 1:29 p.m., Pierre-Yves Péneau wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Someone can commit this patch ? I don't have right access on the > > repository, either Sophiane. > > Thank you. Sorry we've been so slow on this patch. A couple of questions before I commit. 1. Are all of Andreas H.'s

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3502/#review8960 --- Hi, Someone can commit this patch ? I don't have right access on the

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On juil. 27, 2016, 4:52 après-midi, Andreas Hansson wrote: > > src/mem/cache/tags/base_set_assoc.hh, line 228 > > > > > > Could you add a comment here? > > > > It seems to me this code is not right, as it checks

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On July 27, 2016, 4:52 p.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > src/mem/cache/tags/base_set_assoc.hh, line 228 > > > > > > Could you add a comment here? > > > > It seems to me this code is not right, as it checks if the

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On juil. 25, 2016, 1:18 après-midi, Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > > Ship It! > > Sophiane SENNI wrote: > How can I commit the patch ? I am not sure I have the commit access ? > > Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > You can't commit it youself, one of the maintainers will have to commit > it for

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On July 25, 2016, 1:18 p.m., Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > > Ship It! > > Sophiane SENNI wrote: > How can I commit the patch ? I am not sure I have the commit access ? > > Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > You can't commit it youself, one of the maintainers will have to commit > it for you. > >

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On juil. 25, 2016, 1:18 après-midi, Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > > Ship It! > > Sophiane SENNI wrote: > How can I commit the patch ? I am not sure I have the commit access ? > > Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > You can't commit it youself, one of the maintainers will have to commit > it for

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On July 27, 2016, 4:52 p.m., Andreas Hansson wrote: > > To be clear: Please go ahead with the patch as is. I merely wanted to hightlight that there is room for further patches and improvements. - Andreas --- This is an automatically

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3502/ --- (Updated juil. 28, 2016, 10:31 matin) Review request for Default. Repository:

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On juil. 27, 2016, 4:52 après-midi, Andreas Hansson wrote: > > src/mem/cache/tags/Tags.py, line 57 > > > > > > Why would the tags care about the data latency? This is required to initialize the "accessLatency" variable

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3502/#review8552 --- src/mem/cache/tags/Tags.py (line 57)

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On juil. 25, 2016, 1:18 après-midi, Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > > Ship It! > > Sophiane SENNI wrote: > How can I commit the patch ? I am not sure I have the commit access ? > > Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > You can't commit it youself, one of the maintainers will have to commit > it for

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On juil. 25, 2016, 1:18 après-midi, Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > > Ship It! > > Sophiane SENNI wrote: > How can I commit the patch ? I am not sure I have the commit access ? > > Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > You can't commit it youself, one of the maintainers will have to commit > it for

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On July 25, 2016, 1:18 p.m., Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > > Ship It! > > Sophiane SENNI wrote: > How can I commit the patch ? I am not sure I have the commit access ? > > Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > You can't commit it youself, one of the maintainers will have to commit > it for you. > >

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On juil. 25, 2016, 1:18 après-midi, Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > > Ship It! > > Sophiane SENNI wrote: > How can I commit the patch ? I am not sure I have the commit access ? > > Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > You can't commit it youself, one of the maintainers will have to commit > it for

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On July 25, 2016, 1:18 p.m., Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > > Ship It! > > Sophiane SENNI wrote: > How can I commit the patch ? I am not sure I have the commit access ? > > Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > You can't commit it youself, one of the maintainers will have to commit > it for you. Hi

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On July 25, 2016, 1:18 p.m., Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > > Ship It! > > Sophiane SENNI wrote: > How can I commit the patch ? I am not sure I have the commit access ? You can't commit it youself, one of the maintainers will have to commit it for you. - Nikos

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On juil. 25, 2016, 1:18 après-midi, Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > > Ship It! How can I commit the patch ? I am not sure I have the commit access ? - Sophiane --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3502/#review8527 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Pierre-Yves Péneau On July 25, 2016, 3:16 p.m.,

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On juil. 23, 2016, 2:05 après-midi, Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > > src/mem/cache/tags/Tags.py, line 68 > > > > > > This stale argument causes the problems you're facing please remove it, > > I don't think it is needed You

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3502/#review8525 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Nikos Nikoleris On July 25, 2016, 1:16 p.m.,

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3502/ --- (Updated juil. 25, 2016, 1:16 après-midi) Review request for Default.

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3502/#review8519 --- Thanks for all the effort you've put into this. Please make this last

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3502/ --- (Updated juil. 20, 2016, 1:32 après-midi) Review request for Default.

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On June 27, 2016, 5 p.m., Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > > src/mem/cache/tags/base_set_assoc.hh, line 218 > > > > > > Would it make sense to move most of this code in the constructor? The > > flag sequentialAccess and the

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On juin 27, 2016, 5 après-midi, Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > > src/mem/cache/tags/base_set_assoc.hh, line 218 > > > > > > Would it make sense to move most of this code in the constructor? The > > flag sequentialAccess and

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On juin 27, 2016, 5 après-midi, Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > > src/mem/cache/tags/base_set_assoc.hh, line 218 > > > > > > Would it make sense to move most of this code in the constructor? The > > flag sequentialAccess and

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On June 27, 2016, 5 p.m., Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > > src/mem/cache/tags/base_set_assoc.hh, line 218 > > > > > > Would it make sense to move most of this code in the constructor? The > > flag sequentialAccess and the

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On June 27, 2016, 5 p.m., Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > > src/mem/cache/tags/base_set_assoc.hh, line 218 > > > > > > Would it make sense to move most of this code in the constructor? The > > flag sequentialAccess and the

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

> On juin 27, 2016, 5 après-midi, Nikos Nikoleris wrote: > > src/mem/cache/tags/base_set_assoc.hh, line 218 > > > > > > Would it make sense to move most of this code in the constructor? The > > flag sequentialAccess and

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3502/ --- (Updated juin 28, 2016, 1:06 après-midi) Review request for Default. Repository:

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3502/#review8444 --- Sorry, that was probably unclear from my comment but the commit message

Re: [gem5-dev] Review Request 3502: mem: Split the hit_latency into tag_latency and data_latency

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/3502/ --- (Updated juin 28, 2016, 9:57 matin) Review request for Default. Summary