The previous implementation used the value changed event to track when
signals changed value, but there were a couple problems with this
approach. First, this piggybacked on the sensitivity mechanism in some
ways, but diverged in others. The sensitivity didn't notify a process
when it was satisfied like other sensitivity types would, and it also
ignored whether the process was disabled.
Second, the value_changed_event is notified by a signal instance as a
delta notification, but reset signals are supposed to act immediately.
That means they should happen before all delta notifications, or in
other words all delta notifications should see the reset status of a
given process. That's particularly important in the case of wait(int n)
where setting the reset clears the reset count, and the count is
checked when determining whether or not to wake up a process when its
sensitivity is satisfied, potentially by a delta notification.
Third, by removing the middle man and not trying to repurpose the
sensitivity mechanism, the code gets simpler and easier to understand.
Change-Id: I0d05d11437291d368b060f6a45a207813615f113
Reviewed-on: https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/13294
Reviewed-by: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com>
Maintainer: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com>
This creates a depenendency on c++11 which the headers otherwise avoid,
but gem5 itself already has a c++11 dependency and not a boost
dependency, and outside of having a local copy of boost (which
Accellera does) there isn't a good way to put the placeholder values
_1, _2, etc., into the custom sc_unnammed namespace.
Change-Id: I52ca4c1bc52bef6ff2c62e9f3c32af46f95244dc
Reviewed-on: https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/13193
Reviewed-by: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com>
Maintainer: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com>
The implementation is based on sc_event sensitivities.
Also of note is that the way reset works in the Accellera
implementation isn't consistent with the spec. That says that
wait(int n) is supposed to be equivalent to calling wait() n times,
assuming n is greater than 0.
Instead, Accellera stores that count and then doesn't wake up the
process until the count is 0, decrementing it otherwise.
That means that when the process is in reset, it won't actually reset
for those intermediate wait()s which it would if wait() was called
repeatedly. Also, oddly, when a reset becomes asserted, it will clear
the count to 0 explicitly. That may have been an attempt to make the
behavior of wait(int n) match the spec, but it doesn't handle cases
where the reset is already set when wait(int n) is called.
Change-Id: I92f8e9a128e6618af94dc048ce570a4436e17e4b
Reviewed-on: https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/13186
Reviewed-by: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com>
Maintainer: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com>
Make BindInfo into a more general purpose Port class which mirrors
sc_module and Module, sc_object and Object, etc. This tracks multiple
bindings internally, and also pending sensitivities. Keep a global
list of ports which are added in reverse order to match Accellera, and
which is iterated over to finalize binding and for phase callbacks.
This is as opposed to doing it one module at a time, and is to better
match Accellera's ordering for the regressions.
Also the sensitivity classes are now built with factory functions,
which gets around problems calling virtual functions from their
constructors or forgetting to having to have extra boilerplate each
place they're constructed.
The port class also now finalizes port or event finder sensitivities
when its binding is completed, unless it's already complete in which
case it does so immediately.
Change-Id: I1b01689715c425b94e0f68cf0271f5c1565d8c61
Reviewed-on: https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/12806
Reviewed-by: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com>
Maintainer: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com>
Dynamic and Static sensitivities used to be represented by the same
classes, even though they're (almost) disjoint in how they worked. Also
timeouts, which can be used alongside dynamic sensitivities, were
handled by the sensitivities themselves. That meant that the
sensitivity mechanism had to mix in more types of behaviors,
increasing complexity. Also, the non-standard timed_out function
Accellera includes is harder to implement if the path for timeouts and
regular sensitivities are mixed together.
This change splits up dynamic and static sensitivities and splits out
timeouts. It also immitates the ordering Accellera uses when going
through sensitivities for an event. Static sensitivities are triggered
first in reverse order (why?), and then dynamic sensitivities are
triggered in what amounts to reverse order. To delete a sensitivity
which has been handled, it's swapped with the one in the last position,
and then the vector is truncated to drop it at the end. This has the
net effect of stirring the dynamic sensitivities, and isn't easily
immitated using a different approach, even if other approaches would
be more straightforward.
Double check addSensitivity for event.hh
Change-Id: I1e73dce386b95f68e9d6737deb8bed70ef717e0d
Reviewed-on: https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/12805
Reviewed-by: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com>
Maintainer: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com>
We were keeping track of processes which should be initialized and
those which shouldn't on two different lists, and then processing
each list one after the other. This could reorder processes from the
order they were created, and so cause spurious differences which cause
the Accellera tests to fail.
This does make the scheduler slightly simpler, so it's not all bad.
Change-Id: I63306a41ce7bea91fa9ff2f6774ce9150134ce48
Reviewed-on: https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/12613
Reviewed-by: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com>
Maintainer: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com>
Processes which are created in end_of_elaboration aren't created with
sc_spawn but still need to figure out if they're dynamic. Rather than
duplicate the check in sc_spawn, this change centralizes it in the
Process class itself.
Change-Id: I763d5a0fa89a72fbc82346b6ce2eed852ee72524
Reviewed-on: https://gem5-review.googlesource.com/c/12443
Reviewed-by: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com>
Maintainer: Gabe Black <gabeblack@google.com>
