Re: [Gems-users] Do you have the plan to support the Dragon protocol inGEMS?

["Mike Marty" <mikem@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think implementing any update protocol is a challenge in GEMS because of 
memory consistency issues.  The Simics functional simulation implements 
sequential consistency, and this might be hard with an update protocol 
(especially without an atomic bus)
--Mike


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "??" <timmyguo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2007 4:38 AM
Subject: [Gems-users] Do you have the plan to support the Dragon protocol 
inGEMS?

> Dear GEMS TEAM,
> I recently find that a dragon protocol simulation would be beneficial to 
> my
> research. And GEMS doesn't implement this. Do you have a plan on this?
>
> As far as I know, the SLICC language & compiler handles memory transaction
> in per-line basis. I think it's crucial for an updating protocol to handle
> transaction in per-word basis, which not only eliminates false sharing but
> also reduces bandwidth consumption. Do you have a plan to implement this?
>
> G.R.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gems-users mailing list
> Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gems-users
> Use Google to search the GEMS Users mailing list by adding 
> "site:https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/archive/gems-users/"; to your search.