systemc: Fix the priority of the maximum time event.
Change-Id: I3e5e71165d06da77076f0e58012c575e24456182 Reviewed-on: https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/12209 Reviewed-by: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com> Maintainer: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com>
This commit is contained in:
@@ -129,11 +129,14 @@ typedef NodeList<Channel> ChannelList;
|
||||
* MAX RUN TIME
|
||||
*
|
||||
* When sc_start is called, it's possible to pass in a maximum time the
|
||||
* simulation should run to, at which point sc_pause is implicitly called.
|
||||
* That's implemented by scheduling an event at the max time with a priority
|
||||
* which is lower than all the others so that it happens only if time would
|
||||
* advance. When that event triggers, it calls the same function as the pause
|
||||
* event.
|
||||
* simulation should run to, at which point sc_pause is implicitly called. The
|
||||
* simulation is supposed to run up to the latest timed notification phase
|
||||
* which is less than or equal to the maximum time. In other words it should
|
||||
* run timed notifications at the maximum time, but not the subsequent evaluate
|
||||
* phase. That's implemented by scheduling an event at the max time with a
|
||||
* priority which is lower than all the others except the ready event. Timed
|
||||
* notifications will happen before it fires, but it will override any ready
|
||||
* event and prevent the evaluate phase from starting.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
|
||||
class Scheduler
|
||||
@@ -279,9 +282,9 @@ class Scheduler
|
||||
|
||||
static Priority StopPriority = DefaultPriority - 1;
|
||||
static Priority PausePriority = DefaultPriority + 1;
|
||||
static Priority ReadyPriority = DefaultPriority + 2;
|
||||
static Priority MaxTickPriority = DefaultPriority + 2;
|
||||
static Priority ReadyPriority = DefaultPriority + 3;
|
||||
static Priority StarvationPriority = ReadyPriority;
|
||||
static Priority MaxTickPriority = DefaultPriority + 3;
|
||||
|
||||
EventQueue *eq;
|
||||
std::map<Tick, int> pendingTicks;
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user