derek/gem5
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

style: eliminate equality tests with true and false

Browse Source 
Using '== true' in a boolean expression is totally redundant,
and using '== false' is pretty verbose (and arguably less
readable in most cases) compared to '!'.

It's somewhat of a pet peeve, perhaps, but I had some time
waiting for some tests to run and decided to clean these up.

Unfortunately, SLICC appears not to have the '!' operator,
so I had to leave the '== false' tests in the SLICC code.
This commit is contained in:
Steve Reinhardt
2014-05-31 18:00:23 -07:00
parent 2a8088f5ae
commit 0be64ffe2f
24 changed files with 49 additions and 50 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

2
src/cpu/inorder/cpu.cc
View File

@@ -1763,7 +1763,7 @@ InOrderCPU::cleanUpRemovedInsts()
// Clear if Non-Speculative
if (inst->staticInst &&
inst->seqNum == nonSpecSeqNum[tid] &&
nonSpecInstActive[tid] == true) {
nonSpecInstActive[tid]) {
nonSpecInstActive[tid] = false;
}

6
src/cpu/inorder/pipeline_stage.cc
View File

@@ -248,19 +248,19 @@ void
PipelineStage::removeStalls(ThreadID tid)
{
for (int st_num = 0; st_num < NumStages; st_num++) {
if (stalls[tid].stage[st_num] == true) {
if (stalls[tid].stage[st_num]) {
DPRINTF(InOrderStage, "Removing stall from stage %i.\n",
st_num);
stalls[tid].stage[st_num] = false;
}
if (toPrevStages->stageBlock[st_num][tid] == true) {
if (toPrevStages->stageBlock[st_num][tid]) {
DPRINTF(InOrderStage, "Removing pending block from stage %i.\n",
st_num);
toPrevStages->stageBlock[st_num][tid] = false;
}
if (fromNextStages->stageBlock[st_num][tid] == true) {
if (fromNextStages->stageBlock[st_num][tid]) {
DPRINTF(InOrderStage, "Removing pending block from stage %i.\n",
st_num);
fromNextStages->stageBlock[st_num][tid] = false;

2
src/cpu/inorder/resources/use_def.cc
View File

@@ -191,7 +191,7 @@ UseDefUnit::execute(int slot_idx)
// If there is a non-speculative instruction
// in the pipeline then stall instructions here
// ---
if (*nonSpecInstActive[tid] == true && seq_num > *nonSpecSeqNum[tid]) {
if (*nonSpecInstActive[tid] && seq_num > *nonSpecSeqNum[tid]) {
DPRINTF(InOrderUseDef, "[tid:%i]: [sn:%i] cannot execute because"
"there is non-speculative instruction [sn:%i] has not "
"graduated.\n", tid, seq_num, *nonSpecSeqNum[tid]);