Re: [m5-dev] [PATCH 0 of 2] New event queue

2008-06-10 Thread Steve Reinhardt
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 9:33 AM, nathan binkert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Thanks for the patches. Just a few comments/questions: >> >> - Does the indirection of the debug info in Event really save >> anything? As long as TRACING_ON is enabled, you're paying an extra >> pointer of storage plus

Re: [m5-dev] [PATCH 0 of 2] New event queue

2008-06-10 Thread nathan binkert
> Thanks for the patches. Just a few comments/questions: > > - Does the indirection of the debug info in Event really save > anything? As long as TRACING_ON is enabled, you're paying an extra > pointer of storage plus an extra dynamic allocation on every event, > and it's not clear to me just how

Re: [m5-dev] [PATCH 0 of 2] New event queue

2008-06-10 Thread Steve Reinhardt
Thanks for the patches. Just a few comments/questions: - Does the indirection of the debug info in Event really save anything? As long as TRACING_ON is enabled, you're paying an extra pointer of storage plus an extra dynamic allocation on every event, and it's not clear to me just how much you'r

[m5-dev] [PATCH 0 of 2] New event queue

2008-06-09 Thread Nathan Binkert
Since I'm hoping to have the repo all set soon, I figured I'd start sending things out. This my new event queue data structure. It is considerably faster (3x simulation speed for me) for systems that make heavy use of multiple events at the same tick/priority. Stats will change a bit because eve