If an `AddrRange` is not interleaved, return the input address in
`removeIntlvBits` and `addIntlvBits` to prevent undefined behavior. It
allows to use these methods in all cases without having to check
manually whether the range is interleaved.
Change-Id: Ic6ac8c4e52b09417bc41aa9380a24319c34e0b35
Signed-off-by: Isaac Sánchez Barrera <isaac.sanchez@bsc.es>
Reviewed-on: https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/public/gem5/+/37617
Maintainer: Bobby R. Bruce <bbruce@ucdavis.edu>
Tested-by: kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Nikos Nikoleris <nikos.nikoleris@arm.com>
The methods `AddrRange::removeIntlvBits(Addr)` and
`AddrRange::addIntlvBits(Addr)` should be the inverse of one another,
but the latter did not insert the blanks for filling the removed bits in
the correct positions. Since the masks are ordered increasingly by the
position of the least significant bit of each mask, the lowest bit that
has to be inserted at each iteration is always `intlv_bit`, not needing
to be shifted to the left or right. The bits that need to be copied
from the input address are `intlv_bit-1..0` at each iteration.
The test `AddrRangeTest.AddRemoveInterleavBitsAcrossRange` has been
updated have masks below bit 12, making the old code not pass the test.
A new `AddrRangeTest.AddRemoveInterleavBitsAcrossContiguousRange` test
has been added to include a case in which the previous code fails. The
corrected code passes both tests.
This function is not used anywhere other than the tests and the class
`ChannelAddr`. However, it is needed to efficiently implement
interleaved caches in the classic mode.
Change-Id: I7d626a1f6ecf09a230fc18810d2dad2104d1a865
Signed-off-by: Isaac Sánchez Barrera <isaac.sanchez@bsc.es>
Reviewed-on: https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/public/gem5/+/37175
Tested-by: kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Nikos Nikoleris <nikos.nikoleris@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Bobby R. Bruce <bbruce@ucdavis.edu>
Maintainer: Nikos Nikoleris <nikos.nikoleris@arm.com>
Maintainer: Bobby R. Bruce <bbruce@ucdavis.edu>
These were checking for gcc version 3, well below the minimum version we
support, and were hard wired to be enabled anyway. This change gets rid
of the check and the dead code on the hard wired off branch.
Also, this change cleans up the style in the surviving code and
simplifies it slightly.
Change-Id: I8df73a378f478413c111a4dea962450a37fb4092
Reviewed-on: https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/public/gem5/+/35977
Reviewed-by: Daniel Carvalho <odanrc@yahoo.com.br>
Maintainer: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com>
Tested-by: kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
The create() method on Params structs usually instantiate SimObjects
using a constructor which takes the Params struct as a parameter
somehow. There has been a lot of needless variation in how that was
done, making it annoying to pass Params down to base classes. Some of
the different forms were:
const Params &
Params &
Params *
const Params *
Params const*
This change goes through and fixes up every constructor and every
create() method to use the const Params & form. We use a reference
because the Params struct should never be null. We use const because
neither the create method nor the consuming object should modify the
record of the parameters as they came in from the config. That would
make consuming them not idempotent, and make it impossible to tell what
the actual simulation configuration was since it would change from any
user visible form (config script, config.ini, dot pdf output).
Change-Id: I77453cba52fdcfd5f4eec92dfb0bddb5a9945f31
Reviewed-on: https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/public/gem5/+/35938
Reviewed-by: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Carvalho <odanrc@yahoo.com.br>
Maintainer: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com>
Tested-by: kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
The stat system currently assumes that the decision to merge groups is
done at construction time. This makes it hard to implement global
statistics that live in a single global group.
This change adds some error checking to mergeStatGroup and marks it as
a public method.
Change-Id: I6a42f48545c5ccfcd0672bae66a5bc86bb042f13
Signed-off-by: Andreas Sandberg <andreas.sandberg@arm.com>
Reviewed-on: https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/public/gem5/+/35615
Reviewed-by: Jason Lowe-Power <power.jg@gmail.com>
Maintainer: Jason Lowe-Power <power.jg@gmail.com>
Tested-by: kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
Rather than just leaving some macros undefined if none of the scenarios
we checked for match, we should report an error so it's clear what
happened. Otherwise the places the macros are used will just not compile
properly, or worse will silently not work correctly.
Change-Id: Ie010d6b6d1b6a1496a45d9ebc0d75d1c804df12f
Reviewed-on: https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/public/gem5/+/35275
Reviewed-by: Daniel Carvalho <odanrc@yahoo.com.br>
Reviewed-by: Nikos Nikoleris <nikos.nikoleris@arm.com>
Maintainer: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com>
Tested-by: kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
This change replaces the __attribute__ syntax with the now standard [[]]
syntax. It also reorganizes compiler.hh so that all special macros have
some explanatory text saying what they do, and each attribute which has a
standard version can use that if available and what version of c++ it's
standard in is put in a comment.
Also, the requirements as far as where you put [[]] style attributes are
a little more strict than the old school __attribute__ style. The use of
the attribute macros was updated to fit these new, more strict
requirements.
Change-Id: Iace44306a534111f1c38b9856dc9e88cd9b49d2a
Reviewed-on: https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/public/gem5/+/35219
Reviewed-by: Daniel Carvalho <odanrc@yahoo.com.br>
Maintainer: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com>
Tested-by: kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
This macro probably would have been defined to "return" in some cases,
to be put after a call to a function that doesn't return so that the
compiler wouldn't think control would reach the end of a non-void
function. It was only ever defined to expand to nothing, and now that
[[noreturn]] is a standard attribute, it should never be needed going
forward.
Change-Id: I37625eab72deeaede77f9347116b9fddd75febf7
Reviewed-on: https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/public/gem5/+/35217
Reviewed-by: Daniel Carvalho <odanrc@yahoo.com.br>
Maintainer: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com>
Tested-by: kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
Sometimes ELF files have segments in them which are marked as loadable,
but which actually have zero size in memory. When setting up a memory
image we should drop those to avoid confusing other code which tries
to find the footprint of a memory image. No part of these segments,
including their starting address or ending address, need to actually
land on top of memory since they don't actually contain any data.
Change-Id: If8b61d10db139e0f688b6ceabcb8e6a898557469
Reviewed-on: https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/public/gem5/+/35156
Reviewed-by: Giacomo Travaglini <giacomo.travaglini@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Jason Lowe-Power <power.jg@gmail.com>
Maintainer: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com>
Tested-by: kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
Most DPRINTFs will be skipped over most of the time, and when they
aren't they'll already have overhead from string handling, output to the
console and/or a file, etc, which will drown out the behavior of a
branch.
Change-Id: I5475d7b5add63b44f60c0a1d46b4b14e6bf30fd3
Reviewed-on: https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/public/gem5/+/34818
Reviewed-by: Jason Lowe-Power <power.jg@gmail.com>
Maintainer: Jason Lowe-Power <power.jg@gmail.com>
Tested-by: kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
