Searched hist:8922 (Results 1 - 25 of 52) sorted by relevance
| /gem5/src/mem/ | ||
| H A D | fs_translating_port_proxy.hh | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
| H A D | se_translating_port_proxy.hh | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
| H A D | se_translating_port_proxy.cc | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
| H A D | mem_object.hh | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
| H A D | qport.hh | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
| H A D | port_proxy.hh | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
| H A D | fs_translating_port_proxy.cc | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
| H A D | tport.hh | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
| H A D | physical.hh | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
| H A D | tport.cc | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
| /gem5/src/dev/x86/ | ||
| H A D | intdev.cc | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
| H A D | intdev.hh | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
| H A D | i82094aa.cc | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
| H A D | i82094aa.hh | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
| /gem5/src/cpu/testers/directedtest/ | ||
| H A D | RubyDirectedTester.cc | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
| H A D | RubyDirectedTester.hh | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
| /gem5/src/cpu/testers/memtest/ | ||
| H A D | memtest.hh | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
| H A D | memtest.cc | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
| /gem5/src/cpu/testers/rubytest/ | ||
| H A D | RubyTester.cc | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
| H A D | RubyTester.hh | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
| /gem5/src/arch/x86/ | ||
| H A D | pagetable_walker.hh | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
| H A D | tlb.hh | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
| H A D | pagetable_walker.cc | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
| /gem5/src/arch/arm/ | ||
| H A D | table_walker.hh | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
| H A D | tlb.hh | diff 8922:17f037ad8918 Fri Mar 30 09:40:00 EDT 2012 William Wang <william.wang@arm.com> MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++ This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++ code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects. The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations are to come in later patches. The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be a valid return value. The default implementation of these two functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal. The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort (avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a lot of the duplicated code will disappear again. |
Completed in 220 milliseconds