2006-03-26 00:31:20 +01:00
|
|
|
/*
|
2012-02-09 19:06:27 +01:00
|
|
|
* Copyright (c) 2011-2012 ARM Limited
|
2012-01-17 19:55:09 +01:00
|
|
|
* All rights reserved
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* The license below extends only to copyright in the software and shall
|
|
|
|
* not be construed as granting a license to any other intellectual
|
|
|
|
* property including but not limited to intellectual property relating
|
|
|
|
* to a hardware implementation of the functionality of the software
|
|
|
|
* licensed hereunder. You may use the software subject to the license
|
|
|
|
* terms below provided that you ensure that this notice is replicated
|
|
|
|
* unmodified and in its entirety in all distributions of the software,
|
|
|
|
* modified or unmodified, in source code or in binary form.
|
|
|
|
*
|
2006-03-26 00:31:20 +01:00
|
|
|
* Copyright (c) 2006 The Regents of The University of Michigan
|
|
|
|
* All rights reserved.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
|
|
|
|
* modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are
|
|
|
|
* met: redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
|
|
|
|
* notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer;
|
|
|
|
* redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
|
|
|
|
* notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
|
|
|
|
* documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution;
|
|
|
|
* neither the name of the copyright holders nor the names of its
|
|
|
|
* contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from
|
|
|
|
* this software without specific prior written permission.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS
|
|
|
|
* "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT
|
|
|
|
* LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR
|
|
|
|
* A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT
|
|
|
|
* OWNER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL,
|
|
|
|
* SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT
|
|
|
|
* LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE,
|
|
|
|
* DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY
|
|
|
|
* THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT
|
|
|
|
* (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE
|
|
|
|
* OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
|
2006-06-01 01:26:56 +02:00
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* Authors: Ali Saidi
|
2012-01-17 19:55:09 +01:00
|
|
|
* Andreas Hansson
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
* William Wang
|
2006-03-26 00:31:20 +01:00
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
2006-08-15 01:25:07 +02:00
|
|
|
* @file
|
|
|
|
* Definition of a bus object.
|
2006-03-26 00:31:20 +01:00
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
|
2006-07-06 20:41:01 +02:00
|
|
|
#include "base/misc.hh"
|
2006-04-12 01:35:30 +02:00
|
|
|
#include "base/trace.hh"
|
2011-04-15 19:44:32 +02:00
|
|
|
#include "debug/Bus.hh"
|
|
|
|
#include "debug/BusAddrRanges.hh"
|
2006-04-12 01:35:30 +02:00
|
|
|
#include "mem/bus.hh"
|
2006-03-26 00:31:20 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2010-08-17 14:06:21 +02:00
|
|
|
Bus::Bus(const BusParams *p)
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
: MemObject(p), clock(p->clock),
|
2010-08-17 14:06:21 +02:00
|
|
|
headerCycles(p->header_cycles), width(p->width), tickNextIdle(0),
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
drainEvent(NULL), busIdleEvent(this), inRetry(false),
|
2012-02-24 17:43:53 +01:00
|
|
|
nbrMasterPorts(p->port_master_connection_count),
|
2012-02-24 17:40:29 +01:00
|
|
|
defaultPortId(INVALID_PORT_ID), useDefaultRange(p->use_default_range),
|
|
|
|
defaultBlockSize(p->block_size),
|
2010-08-17 14:06:21 +02:00
|
|
|
cachedBlockSize(0), cachedBlockSizeValid(false)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
//width, clock period, and header cycles must be positive
|
|
|
|
if (width <= 0)
|
|
|
|
fatal("Bus width must be positive\n");
|
|
|
|
if (clock <= 0)
|
|
|
|
fatal("Bus clock period must be positive\n");
|
|
|
|
if (headerCycles <= 0)
|
|
|
|
fatal("Number of header cycles must be positive\n");
|
2012-02-24 17:43:53 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// create the ports based on the size of the master and slave
|
|
|
|
// vector ports, and the presence of the default master
|
|
|
|
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
// id used to index into master and slave ports, that currently
|
|
|
|
// has holes to be able to use the id to index into either
|
2012-02-24 17:43:53 +01:00
|
|
|
int id = 0;
|
|
|
|
for (int i = 0; i < p->port_master_connection_count; ++i) {
|
|
|
|
std::string portName = csprintf("%s-p%d", name(), id);
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
BusMasterPort* bp = new BusMasterPort(portName, this, id);
|
|
|
|
masterPorts.push_back(bp);
|
|
|
|
slavePorts.push_back(NULL);
|
2012-02-24 17:43:53 +01:00
|
|
|
++id;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// see if we have a default master connected and if so add the
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
// port
|
2012-02-24 17:43:53 +01:00
|
|
|
if (p->port_default_connection_count) {
|
|
|
|
defaultPortId = id;
|
|
|
|
std::string portName = csprintf("%s-default", name());
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
BusMasterPort* bp = new BusMasterPort(portName, this, id);
|
|
|
|
masterPorts.push_back(bp);
|
|
|
|
slavePorts.push_back(NULL);
|
2012-02-24 17:43:53 +01:00
|
|
|
++id;
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
// this is an additional master port
|
|
|
|
++nbrMasterPorts;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// note that the first slave port is now stored on index
|
|
|
|
// nbrMasterPorts in the vector
|
|
|
|
for (int i = 0; i < p->port_slave_connection_count; ++i) {
|
|
|
|
std::string portName = csprintf("%s-p%d", name(), id);
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
BusSlavePort* bp = new BusSlavePort(portName, this, id);
|
|
|
|
masterPorts.push_back(NULL);
|
|
|
|
slavePorts.push_back(bp);
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
++id;
|
2012-02-24 17:43:53 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-08-17 14:06:21 +02:00
|
|
|
clearPortCache();
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
MasterPort &
|
|
|
|
Bus::getMasterPort(const std::string &if_name, int idx)
|
2006-05-26 19:48:35 +02:00
|
|
|
{
|
2012-02-24 17:43:53 +01:00
|
|
|
if (if_name == "master") {
|
|
|
|
// the master index translates directly to the interfaces
|
|
|
|
// vector as they are stored first
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
return *masterPorts[idx];
|
2012-02-24 17:43:53 +01:00
|
|
|
} else if (if_name == "default") {
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
return *masterPorts[defaultPortId];
|
2012-01-17 19:55:09 +01:00
|
|
|
} else {
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
return MemObject::getMasterPort(if_name, idx);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SlavePort &
|
|
|
|
Bus::getSlavePort(const std::string &if_name, int idx)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
if (if_name == "slave") {
|
|
|
|
return *slavePorts[nbrMasterPorts + idx];
|
|
|
|
} else {
|
|
|
|
return MemObject::getSlavePort(if_name, idx);
|
2006-11-02 21:20:37 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
2006-05-26 19:48:35 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2006-04-28 21:37:48 +02:00
|
|
|
void
|
|
|
|
Bus::init()
|
|
|
|
{
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
std::vector<BusSlavePort*>::iterator intIter;
|
2006-07-06 20:41:01 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2012-01-17 19:55:09 +01:00
|
|
|
// iterate over our interfaces and determine which of our neighbours
|
|
|
|
// are snooping and add them as snoopers
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
for (intIter = slavePorts.begin(); intIter != slavePorts.end();
|
2012-01-17 19:55:09 +01:00
|
|
|
intIter++) {
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
// since there are holes in the vector, check for NULL
|
|
|
|
if (*intIter != NULL) {
|
|
|
|
if ((*intIter)->getMasterPort().isSnooping()) {
|
|
|
|
DPRINTF(BusAddrRanges, "Adding snooping neighbour %s\n",
|
|
|
|
(*intIter)->getMasterPort().name());
|
|
|
|
snoopPorts.push_back(*intIter);
|
|
|
|
}
|
2012-01-17 19:55:09 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
2006-04-28 21:37:48 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2008-10-09 13:58:24 +02:00
|
|
|
Tick
|
|
|
|
Bus::calcPacketTiming(PacketPtr pkt)
|
2006-03-26 00:31:20 +01:00
|
|
|
{
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
// determine the current time rounded to the closest following
|
|
|
|
// clock edge
|
|
|
|
Tick now = curTick();
|
|
|
|
if (now % clock != 0) {
|
|
|
|
now = ((now / clock) + 1) * clock;
|
2007-06-20 20:54:17 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
2006-10-10 05:24:21 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
Tick headerTime = now + headerCycles * clock;
|
2008-02-26 08:20:08 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2006-10-10 05:24:21 +02:00
|
|
|
// The packet will be sent. Figure out how long it occupies the bus, and
|
|
|
|
// how much of that time is for the first "word", aka bus width.
|
2006-10-10 00:12:45 +02:00
|
|
|
int numCycles = 0;
|
2008-02-26 08:20:08 +01:00
|
|
|
if (pkt->hasData()) {
|
2006-10-10 00:12:45 +02:00
|
|
|
// If a packet has data, it needs ceil(size/width) cycles to send it
|
2008-02-26 08:20:08 +01:00
|
|
|
int dataSize = pkt->getSize();
|
|
|
|
numCycles += dataSize/width;
|
|
|
|
if (dataSize % width)
|
2006-10-10 00:12:45 +02:00
|
|
|
numCycles++;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2006-10-10 05:24:21 +02:00
|
|
|
// The first word will be delivered after the current tick, the delivery
|
|
|
|
// of the address if any, and one bus cycle to deliver the data
|
2008-02-26 08:20:08 +01:00
|
|
|
pkt->firstWordTime = headerTime + clock;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pkt->finishTime = headerTime + numCycles * clock;
|
2008-03-17 08:07:38 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return headerTime;
|
2008-02-26 08:20:08 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void Bus::occupyBus(Tick until)
|
|
|
|
{
|
2008-03-17 08:07:38 +01:00
|
|
|
if (until == 0) {
|
|
|
|
// shortcut for express snoop packets
|
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2008-02-26 08:20:08 +01:00
|
|
|
tickNextIdle = until;
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
reschedule(busIdleEvent, tickNextIdle, true);
|
2006-10-10 05:24:21 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DPRINTF(Bus, "The bus is now occupied from tick %d to %d\n",
|
2011-01-08 06:50:29 +01:00
|
|
|
curTick(), tickNextIdle);
|
2006-10-11 05:28:33 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** Function called by the port when the bus is receiving a Timing
|
|
|
|
* transaction.*/
|
|
|
|
bool
|
2006-10-20 09:10:12 +02:00
|
|
|
Bus::recvTiming(PacketPtr pkt)
|
2006-10-11 05:28:33 +02:00
|
|
|
{
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
// called for both requests and responses
|
2006-10-11 05:28:33 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
// get the source id and port
|
|
|
|
Packet::NodeID src_id = pkt->getSrc();
|
|
|
|
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
// determine the source port based on the id
|
|
|
|
Port *src_port = slavePorts[src_id] ?
|
|
|
|
(Port*) slavePorts[src_id] : (Port*) masterPorts[src_id];
|
2006-10-11 05:28:33 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// If the bus is busy, or other devices are in line ahead of the current
|
|
|
|
// one, put this device on the retry list.
|
2007-07-29 22:24:48 +02:00
|
|
|
if (!pkt->isExpressSnoop() &&
|
2011-01-08 06:50:29 +01:00
|
|
|
(tickNextIdle > curTick() ||
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
(!retryList.empty() && (!inRetry || src_port != retryList.front()))))
|
2007-05-19 07:35:04 +02:00
|
|
|
{
|
2007-07-25 07:37:41 +02:00
|
|
|
addToRetryList(src_port);
|
2007-09-17 01:46:38 +02:00
|
|
|
DPRINTF(Bus, "recvTiming: src %d dst %d %s 0x%x BUSY\n",
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
src_id, pkt->getDest(), pkt->cmdString(), pkt->getAddr());
|
2006-10-11 05:28:33 +02:00
|
|
|
return false;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2007-09-17 01:46:38 +02:00
|
|
|
DPRINTF(Bus, "recvTiming: src %d dst %d %s 0x%x\n",
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
src_id, pkt->getDest(), pkt->cmdString(), pkt->getAddr());
|
2007-09-17 01:46:38 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2008-03-17 08:07:38 +01:00
|
|
|
Tick headerFinishTime = pkt->isExpressSnoop() ? 0 : calcPacketTiming(pkt);
|
|
|
|
Tick packetFinishTime = pkt->isExpressSnoop() ? 0 : pkt->finishTime;
|
2007-07-25 07:37:41 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
Packet::NodeID dest = pkt->getDest();
|
|
|
|
int dest_id;
|
2007-07-25 07:37:41 +02:00
|
|
|
Port *dest_port;
|
2007-03-23 18:09:37 +01:00
|
|
|
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
if (pkt->isRequest()) {
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
// the packet is a memory-mapped request and should be broadcasted to
|
|
|
|
// our snoopers
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
assert(dest == Packet::Broadcast);
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2007-08-10 22:14:01 +02:00
|
|
|
SnoopIter s_end = snoopPorts.end();
|
|
|
|
for (SnoopIter s_iter = snoopPorts.begin(); s_iter != s_end; s_iter++) {
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
BusSlavePort *p = *s_iter;
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
// we got this request from a snooping master
|
|
|
|
// (corresponding to our own slave port that is also in
|
|
|
|
// snoopPorts) and should not send it back to where it
|
|
|
|
// came from
|
|
|
|
if (p->getId() != src_id) {
|
2007-07-25 07:37:41 +02:00
|
|
|
// cache is not allowed to refuse snoop
|
2007-08-10 22:14:01 +02:00
|
|
|
bool success M5_VAR_USED = p->sendTiming(pkt);
|
2007-07-25 07:37:41 +02:00
|
|
|
assert(success);
|
2006-10-11 05:28:33 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// since it is a request, similar to functional and atomic,
|
|
|
|
// determine the destination based on the address and forward
|
|
|
|
// through the corresponding master port
|
|
|
|
dest_id = findPort(pkt->getAddr());
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
dest_port = masterPorts[dest_id];
|
2006-10-11 05:28:33 +02:00
|
|
|
} else {
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
// the packet is a response, and it should always go back to
|
|
|
|
// the port determined by the destination field
|
|
|
|
dest_id = dest;
|
|
|
|
assert(dest_id != src_id); // catch infinite loops
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
dest_port = slavePorts[dest_id] ?
|
|
|
|
(Port*) slavePorts[dest_id] : (Port*) masterPorts[dest_id];
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// a normal response from the memory system (i.e. from a
|
|
|
|
// connected slave) should always go back to the master
|
|
|
|
// that issued it through one of our slave ports, however
|
|
|
|
// if this is a snoop response it could go either way, for
|
|
|
|
// example, it could be coming from a slave port
|
|
|
|
// connecting an L1 with a coherent master and another L1
|
|
|
|
// coherent master (one of our slave ports), or coming
|
|
|
|
// from the L1 and going to the L2 slave port (through one
|
|
|
|
// of our master ports)
|
2006-10-11 05:28:33 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
assert(dest_port != NULL);
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
// if this is a snoop from a slave (corresponding to our own
|
|
|
|
// master), i.e. the memory side of the bus, then do not send it
|
|
|
|
// back to where it came from
|
|
|
|
if (dest_id != src_id) {
|
2007-07-25 07:37:41 +02:00
|
|
|
// send to actual target
|
|
|
|
if (!dest_port->sendTiming(pkt)) {
|
|
|
|
// Packet not successfully sent. Leave or put it on the retry list.
|
|
|
|
// illegal to block responses... can lead to deadlock
|
|
|
|
assert(!pkt->isResponse());
|
2009-10-04 03:07:39 +02:00
|
|
|
// It's also illegal to force a transaction to retry after
|
|
|
|
// someone else has committed to respond.
|
|
|
|
assert(!pkt->memInhibitAsserted());
|
2007-09-17 01:46:38 +02:00
|
|
|
DPRINTF(Bus, "recvTiming: src %d dst %d %s 0x%x TGT RETRY\n",
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
src_id, pkt->getDest(), pkt->cmdString(), pkt->getAddr());
|
2007-07-25 07:37:41 +02:00
|
|
|
addToRetryList(src_port);
|
2008-03-17 08:07:38 +01:00
|
|
|
occupyBus(headerFinishTime);
|
2007-07-25 07:37:41 +02:00
|
|
|
return false;
|
2006-10-09 00:44:49 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
2008-03-17 08:07:38 +01:00
|
|
|
// send OK, fall through... pkt may have been deleted by
|
|
|
|
// target at this point, so it should *not* be referenced
|
|
|
|
// again. We'll set it to NULL here just to be safe.
|
|
|
|
pkt = NULL;
|
2006-11-14 23:15:05 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
2007-07-25 07:37:41 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2008-03-17 08:07:38 +01:00
|
|
|
occupyBus(packetFinishTime);
|
2008-02-26 08:20:08 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2007-07-25 07:37:41 +02:00
|
|
|
// Packet was successfully sent.
|
|
|
|
// Also take care of retries
|
|
|
|
if (inRetry) {
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
DPRINTF(Bus, "Remove retry from list %d\n", src_id);
|
2007-07-25 07:37:41 +02:00
|
|
|
retryList.pop_front();
|
|
|
|
inRetry = false;
|
2006-05-31 00:57:42 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
2007-07-25 07:37:41 +02:00
|
|
|
return true;
|
2006-03-26 00:31:20 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2006-05-31 00:57:42 +02:00
|
|
|
void
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
Bus::releaseBus()
|
2006-05-31 00:57:42 +02:00
|
|
|
{
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
// releasing the bus means we should now be idle
|
|
|
|
assert(curTick() >= tickNextIdle);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// bus is now idle, so if someone is waiting we can retry
|
|
|
|
if (!retryList.empty()) {
|
|
|
|
// note that we block (return false on recvTiming) both
|
|
|
|
// because the bus is busy and because the destination is
|
|
|
|
// busy, and in the latter case the bus may be released before
|
|
|
|
// we see a retry from the destination
|
|
|
|
retryWaiting();
|
2006-05-31 00:57:42 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2006-11-07 20:25:54 +01:00
|
|
|
//If we weren't able to drain before, we might be able to now.
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
if (drainEvent && retryList.empty() && curTick() >= tickNextIdle) {
|
2006-11-07 20:25:54 +01:00
|
|
|
drainEvent->process();
|
2006-11-09 17:33:44 +01:00
|
|
|
// Clear the drain event once we're done with it.
|
|
|
|
drainEvent = NULL;
|
|
|
|
}
|
2006-05-31 00:57:42 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
void
|
|
|
|
Bus::retryWaiting()
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
// this should never be called with an empty retry list
|
|
|
|
assert(!retryList.empty());
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// send a retry to the port at the head of the retry list
|
|
|
|
inRetry = true;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// note that we might have blocked on the receiving port being
|
|
|
|
// busy (rather than the bus itself) and now call retry before the
|
|
|
|
// destination called retry on the bus
|
|
|
|
retryList.front()->sendRetry();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// If inRetry is still true, sendTiming wasn't called in zero time
|
|
|
|
// (e.g. the cache does this)
|
|
|
|
if (inRetry) {
|
|
|
|
retryList.pop_front();
|
|
|
|
inRetry = false;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
//Bring tickNextIdle up to the present
|
|
|
|
while (tickNextIdle < curTick())
|
|
|
|
tickNextIdle += clock;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
//Burn a cycle for the missed grant.
|
|
|
|
tickNextIdle += clock;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reschedule(busIdleEvent, tickNextIdle, true);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void
|
|
|
|
Bus::recvRetry(int id)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
// we got a retry from a peer that we tried to send something to
|
|
|
|
// and failed, but we sent it on the account of someone else, and
|
|
|
|
// that source port should be on our retry list, however if the
|
|
|
|
// bus is released before this happens and the retry (from the bus
|
|
|
|
// point of view) is successful then this no longer holds and we
|
|
|
|
// could in fact have an empty retry list
|
|
|
|
if (retryList.empty())
|
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// if the bus isn't busy
|
|
|
|
if (curTick() >= tickNextIdle) {
|
|
|
|
// note that we do not care who told us to retry at the moment, we
|
|
|
|
// merely let the first one on the retry list go
|
|
|
|
retryWaiting();
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2007-07-16 05:09:03 +02:00
|
|
|
int
|
|
|
|
Bus::findPort(Addr addr)
|
2006-03-26 00:31:20 +01:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
/* An interval tree would be a better way to do this. --ali. */
|
2010-08-17 14:06:21 +02:00
|
|
|
int dest_id;
|
2006-03-26 00:31:20 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2007-08-04 22:05:55 +02:00
|
|
|
dest_id = checkPortCache(addr);
|
2012-02-24 17:40:29 +01:00
|
|
|
if (dest_id != INVALID_PORT_ID)
|
2010-08-17 14:06:21 +02:00
|
|
|
return dest_id;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Check normal port ranges
|
|
|
|
PortIter i = portMap.find(RangeSize(addr,1));
|
|
|
|
if (i != portMap.end()) {
|
|
|
|
dest_id = i->second;
|
|
|
|
updatePortCache(dest_id, i->first.start, i->first.end);
|
|
|
|
return dest_id;
|
2007-08-04 22:05:55 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
2006-07-06 20:41:01 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Check if this matches the default range
|
2010-08-17 14:06:21 +02:00
|
|
|
if (useDefaultRange) {
|
2007-08-10 22:14:01 +02:00
|
|
|
AddrRangeIter a_end = defaultRange.end();
|
|
|
|
for (AddrRangeIter i = defaultRange.begin(); i != a_end; i++) {
|
|
|
|
if (*i == addr) {
|
2006-08-28 18:55:13 +02:00
|
|
|
DPRINTF(Bus, " found addr %#llx on default\n", addr);
|
2012-01-17 19:55:09 +01:00
|
|
|
return defaultPortId;
|
2006-07-06 20:41:01 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
2012-02-24 17:40:29 +01:00
|
|
|
} else if (defaultPortId != INVALID_PORT_ID) {
|
|
|
|
DPRINTF(Bus, "Unable to find destination for addr %#llx, "
|
|
|
|
"will use default port\n", addr);
|
|
|
|
return defaultPortId;
|
2006-07-06 20:41:01 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2012-02-24 17:40:29 +01:00
|
|
|
// we should use the range for the default port and it did not
|
|
|
|
// match, or the default port is not set
|
|
|
|
fatal("Unable to find destination for addr %#llx on bus %s\n", addr,
|
|
|
|
name());
|
2006-03-26 00:31:20 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2006-10-09 00:48:03 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2006-05-26 20:17:33 +02:00
|
|
|
/** Function called by the port when the bus is receiving a Atomic
|
2006-03-26 00:31:20 +01:00
|
|
|
* transaction.*/
|
|
|
|
Tick
|
2006-10-20 09:10:12 +02:00
|
|
|
Bus::recvAtomic(PacketPtr pkt)
|
2006-03-26 00:31:20 +01:00
|
|
|
{
|
2006-05-26 20:17:33 +02:00
|
|
|
DPRINTF(Bus, "recvAtomic: packet src %d dest %d addr 0x%x cmd %s\n",
|
|
|
|
pkt->getSrc(), pkt->getDest(), pkt->getAddr(), pkt->cmdString());
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// we should always see a request routed based on the address
|
2006-05-26 20:17:33 +02:00
|
|
|
assert(pkt->getDest() == Packet::Broadcast);
|
2007-06-30 19:16:18 +02:00
|
|
|
assert(pkt->isRequest());
|
2006-11-09 17:37:26 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
// the packet may be changed by another bus on snoops, record the
|
|
|
|
// source id here
|
|
|
|
Packet::NodeID src_id = pkt->getSrc();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// record the original command to enable us to restore it between
|
|
|
|
// snoops so that additional snoops can take place properly
|
2007-06-18 02:27:53 +02:00
|
|
|
MemCmd orig_cmd = pkt->cmd;
|
2007-07-02 10:02:35 +02:00
|
|
|
MemCmd snoop_response_cmd = MemCmd::InvalidCmd;
|
|
|
|
Tick snoop_response_latency = 0;
|
2006-11-14 07:12:52 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-18 02:27:53 +02:00
|
|
|
SnoopIter s_end = snoopPorts.end();
|
|
|
|
for (SnoopIter s_iter = snoopPorts.begin(); s_iter != s_end; s_iter++) {
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
BusSlavePort *p = *s_iter;
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
// we could have gotten this request from a snooping master
|
|
|
|
// (corresponding to our own slave port that is also in
|
|
|
|
// snoopPorts) and should not send it back to where it came
|
|
|
|
// from
|
|
|
|
if (p->getId() != src_id) {
|
2007-07-02 10:02:35 +02:00
|
|
|
Tick latency = p->sendAtomic(pkt);
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
// in contrast to a functional access, we have to keep on
|
|
|
|
// going as all snoopers must be updated even if we get a
|
|
|
|
// response
|
2007-06-30 19:16:18 +02:00
|
|
|
if (pkt->isResponse()) {
|
2007-06-18 02:27:53 +02:00
|
|
|
// response from snoop agent
|
|
|
|
assert(pkt->cmd != orig_cmd);
|
|
|
|
assert(pkt->memInhibitAsserted());
|
|
|
|
// should only happen once
|
2007-07-02 10:02:35 +02:00
|
|
|
assert(snoop_response_cmd == MemCmd::InvalidCmd);
|
2007-06-18 02:27:53 +02:00
|
|
|
// save response state
|
2007-07-02 10:02:35 +02:00
|
|
|
snoop_response_cmd = pkt->cmd;
|
|
|
|
snoop_response_latency = latency;
|
2007-06-18 02:27:53 +02:00
|
|
|
// restore original packet state for remaining snoopers
|
|
|
|
pkt->cmd = orig_cmd;
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
pkt->setSrc(src_id);
|
2007-06-30 19:16:18 +02:00
|
|
|
pkt->setDest(Packet::Broadcast);
|
2007-06-18 02:27:53 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
// even if we had a snoop response, we must continue and also
|
|
|
|
// perform the actual request at the destination
|
|
|
|
int dest_id = findPort(pkt->getAddr());
|
|
|
|
|
2007-07-16 05:09:03 +02:00
|
|
|
Tick response_latency = 0;
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
// if this is a snoop from a slave (corresponding to our own
|
|
|
|
// master), i.e. the memory side of the bus, then do not send it
|
|
|
|
// back to where it came from
|
|
|
|
if (dest_id != src_id) {
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
response_latency = masterPorts[dest_id]->sendAtomic(pkt);
|
2007-07-16 05:09:03 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
2007-06-18 02:27:53 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// if we got a response from a snooper, restore it here
|
2007-07-02 10:02:35 +02:00
|
|
|
if (snoop_response_cmd != MemCmd::InvalidCmd) {
|
2007-06-18 02:27:53 +02:00
|
|
|
// no one else should have responded
|
2007-06-30 19:16:18 +02:00
|
|
|
assert(!pkt->isResponse());
|
2007-06-18 02:27:53 +02:00
|
|
|
assert(pkt->cmd == orig_cmd);
|
2007-07-02 10:02:35 +02:00
|
|
|
pkt->cmd = snoop_response_cmd;
|
|
|
|
response_latency = snoop_response_latency;
|
2007-06-18 02:27:53 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// why do we have this packet field and the return value both???
|
2011-01-08 06:50:29 +01:00
|
|
|
pkt->finishTime = curTick() + response_latency;
|
2007-07-02 10:02:35 +02:00
|
|
|
return response_latency;
|
2006-03-26 00:31:20 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2006-05-26 20:17:33 +02:00
|
|
|
/** Function called by the port when the bus is receiving a Functional
|
2006-03-26 00:31:20 +01:00
|
|
|
* transaction.*/
|
|
|
|
void
|
2006-10-20 09:10:12 +02:00
|
|
|
Bus::recvFunctional(PacketPtr pkt)
|
2006-03-26 00:31:20 +01:00
|
|
|
{
|
2012-01-10 01:08:20 +01:00
|
|
|
if (!pkt->isPrint()) {
|
|
|
|
// don't do DPRINTFs on PrintReq as it clutters up the output
|
|
|
|
DPRINTF(Bus,
|
|
|
|
"recvFunctional: packet src %d dest %d addr 0x%x cmd %s\n",
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
pkt->getSrc(), pkt->getDest(), pkt->getAddr(),
|
2012-01-10 01:08:20 +01:00
|
|
|
pkt->cmdString());
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
// we should always see a request routed based on the address
|
|
|
|
assert(pkt->getDest() == Packet::Broadcast);
|
|
|
|
assert(pkt->isRequest());
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// the packet may be changed by another bus on snoops, record the
|
|
|
|
// source id here
|
|
|
|
Packet::NodeID src_id = pkt->getSrc();
|
2007-07-25 07:37:41 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2007-08-10 22:14:01 +02:00
|
|
|
SnoopIter s_end = snoopPorts.end();
|
|
|
|
for (SnoopIter s_iter = snoopPorts.begin(); s_iter != s_end; s_iter++) {
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
BusSlavePort *p = *s_iter;
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
// we could have gotten this request from a snooping master
|
|
|
|
// (corresponding to our own slave port that is also in
|
|
|
|
// snoopPorts) and should not send it back to where it came
|
|
|
|
// from
|
|
|
|
if (p->getId() != src_id) {
|
2007-07-25 07:37:41 +02:00
|
|
|
p->sendFunctional(pkt);
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// if we get a response we are done
|
|
|
|
if (pkt->isResponse()) {
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
2007-07-25 07:37:41 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
2006-10-12 21:02:25 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
// there is no need to continue if the snooping has found what we
|
|
|
|
// were looking for and the packet is already a response
|
|
|
|
if (!pkt->isResponse()) {
|
|
|
|
int dest_id = findPort(pkt->getAddr());
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// if this is a snoop from a slave (corresponding to our own
|
|
|
|
// master), i.e. the memory side of the bus, then do not send
|
|
|
|
// it back to where it came from,
|
|
|
|
if (dest_id != src_id) {
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
masterPorts[dest_id]->sendFunctional(pkt);
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
2006-11-14 01:56:34 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
2006-03-26 00:31:20 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2012-01-17 19:55:09 +01:00
|
|
|
/** Function called by the port when the bus is receiving a range change.*/
|
2006-03-26 00:31:20 +01:00
|
|
|
void
|
2012-01-17 19:55:09 +01:00
|
|
|
Bus::recvRangeChange(int id)
|
2006-03-26 00:31:20 +01:00
|
|
|
{
|
2006-07-06 20:41:01 +02:00
|
|
|
AddrRangeList ranges;
|
|
|
|
AddrRangeIter iter;
|
|
|
|
|
2012-01-17 19:55:09 +01:00
|
|
|
if (inRecvRangeChange.count(id))
|
2007-08-10 22:14:01 +02:00
|
|
|
return;
|
2012-01-17 19:55:09 +01:00
|
|
|
inRecvRangeChange.insert(id);
|
2006-04-07 22:26:22 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2006-05-26 20:24:46 +02:00
|
|
|
DPRINTF(BusAddrRanges, "received RangeChange from device id %d\n", id);
|
2006-05-26 20:17:33 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2007-08-04 22:05:55 +02:00
|
|
|
clearPortCache();
|
2012-01-17 19:55:09 +01:00
|
|
|
if (id == defaultPortId) {
|
2006-07-06 20:41:01 +02:00
|
|
|
defaultRange.clear();
|
2006-11-02 21:20:37 +01:00
|
|
|
// Only try to update these ranges if the user set a default responder.
|
2010-08-17 14:06:21 +02:00
|
|
|
if (useDefaultRange) {
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
AddrRangeList ranges =
|
|
|
|
masterPorts[id]->getSlavePort().getAddrRanges();
|
2006-11-02 21:20:37 +01:00
|
|
|
for(iter = ranges.begin(); iter != ranges.end(); iter++) {
|
|
|
|
defaultRange.push_back(*iter);
|
|
|
|
DPRINTF(BusAddrRanges, "Adding range %#llx - %#llx for default range\n",
|
|
|
|
iter->start, iter->end);
|
|
|
|
}
|
2006-07-06 20:41:01 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
} else {
|
2006-04-20 23:14:30 +02:00
|
|
|
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
assert(id < masterPorts.size() && id >= 0);
|
|
|
|
BusMasterPort *port = masterPorts[id];
|
2006-07-06 20:41:01 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Clean out any previously existent ids
|
2007-05-22 08:36:09 +02:00
|
|
|
for (PortIter portIter = portMap.begin();
|
|
|
|
portIter != portMap.end(); ) {
|
2006-12-15 07:49:41 +01:00
|
|
|
if (portIter->second == id)
|
|
|
|
portMap.erase(portIter++);
|
2006-07-06 20:41:01 +02:00
|
|
|
else
|
|
|
|
portIter++;
|
|
|
|
}
|
2006-04-06 06:51:46 +02:00
|
|
|
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
ranges = port->getSlavePort().getAddrRanges();
|
2006-08-22 22:08:18 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2007-05-22 08:36:09 +02:00
|
|
|
for (iter = ranges.begin(); iter != ranges.end(); iter++) {
|
2006-08-28 18:55:13 +02:00
|
|
|
DPRINTF(BusAddrRanges, "Adding range %#llx - %#llx for id %d\n",
|
2006-12-15 07:49:41 +01:00
|
|
|
iter->start, iter->end, id);
|
2008-06-21 07:06:27 +02:00
|
|
|
if (portMap.insert(*iter, id) == portMap.end()) {
|
|
|
|
int conflict_id = portMap.find(*iter)->second;
|
|
|
|
fatal("%s has two ports with same range:\n\t%s\n\t%s\n",
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
name(), masterPorts[id]->getSlavePort().name(),
|
|
|
|
masterPorts[conflict_id]->getSlavePort().name());
|
2008-06-21 07:06:27 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
2006-07-06 20:41:01 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
2006-04-20 23:14:30 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
DPRINTF(BusAddrRanges, "port list has %d entries\n", portMap.size());
|
2006-04-28 21:37:48 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// tell all our peers that our address range has changed.
|
|
|
|
// Don't tell the device that caused this change, it already knows
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
std::vector<BusSlavePort*>::const_iterator intIter;
|
2007-03-09 00:57:15 +01:00
|
|
|
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
for (intIter = slavePorts.begin(); intIter != slavePorts.end(); intIter++)
|
|
|
|
if (*intIter != NULL && (*intIter)->getId() != id)
|
2012-01-17 19:55:09 +01:00
|
|
|
(*intIter)->sendRangeChange();
|
2006-07-06 20:41:01 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2012-01-17 19:55:09 +01:00
|
|
|
inRecvRangeChange.erase(id);
|
2006-03-26 00:31:20 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2012-01-17 19:55:09 +01:00
|
|
|
AddrRangeList
|
|
|
|
Bus::getAddrRanges(int id)
|
2006-03-26 00:31:20 +01:00
|
|
|
{
|
2012-01-17 19:55:09 +01:00
|
|
|
AddrRangeList ranges;
|
2006-04-28 21:37:48 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2006-05-26 20:24:46 +02:00
|
|
|
DPRINTF(BusAddrRanges, "received address range request, returning:\n");
|
2006-07-06 20:41:01 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2007-05-22 08:36:09 +02:00
|
|
|
for (AddrRangeIter dflt_iter = defaultRange.begin();
|
|
|
|
dflt_iter != defaultRange.end(); dflt_iter++) {
|
2012-01-17 19:55:09 +01:00
|
|
|
ranges.push_back(*dflt_iter);
|
2006-11-14 01:56:34 +01:00
|
|
|
DPRINTF(BusAddrRanges, " -- Dflt: %#llx : %#llx\n",dflt_iter->start,
|
2006-07-06 20:41:01 +02:00
|
|
|
dflt_iter->end);
|
|
|
|
}
|
2007-05-22 08:36:09 +02:00
|
|
|
for (PortIter portIter = portMap.begin();
|
|
|
|
portIter != portMap.end(); portIter++) {
|
|
|
|
bool subset = false;
|
|
|
|
for (AddrRangeIter dflt_iter = defaultRange.begin();
|
|
|
|
dflt_iter != defaultRange.end(); dflt_iter++) {
|
2006-12-15 07:49:41 +01:00
|
|
|
if ((portIter->first.start < dflt_iter->start &&
|
|
|
|
portIter->first.end >= dflt_iter->start) ||
|
|
|
|
(portIter->first.start < dflt_iter->end &&
|
|
|
|
portIter->first.end >= dflt_iter->end))
|
2006-07-06 20:41:01 +02:00
|
|
|
fatal("Devices can not set ranges that itersect the default set\
|
|
|
|
but are not a subset of the default set.\n");
|
2006-12-15 07:49:41 +01:00
|
|
|
if (portIter->first.start >= dflt_iter->start &&
|
|
|
|
portIter->first.end <= dflt_iter->end) {
|
2006-07-06 20:41:01 +02:00
|
|
|
subset = true;
|
2006-08-28 18:55:13 +02:00
|
|
|
DPRINTF(BusAddrRanges, " -- %#llx : %#llx is a SUBSET\n",
|
2006-12-15 07:49:41 +01:00
|
|
|
portIter->first.start, portIter->first.end);
|
2006-07-06 20:41:01 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
2006-12-15 07:49:41 +01:00
|
|
|
if (portIter->second != id && !subset) {
|
2012-01-17 19:55:09 +01:00
|
|
|
ranges.push_back(portIter->first);
|
2006-08-28 18:55:13 +02:00
|
|
|
DPRINTF(BusAddrRanges, " -- %#llx : %#llx\n",
|
2006-12-15 07:49:41 +01:00
|
|
|
portIter->first.start, portIter->first.end);
|
2006-11-14 01:56:34 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2012-01-17 19:55:09 +01:00
|
|
|
return ranges;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
bool
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
Bus::isSnooping(int id) const
|
2012-01-17 19:55:09 +01:00
|
|
|
{
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
// in essence, answer the question if there are snooping ports
|
|
|
|
return !snoopPorts.empty();
|
2006-03-26 00:31:20 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-05 08:21:12 +02:00
|
|
|
unsigned
|
2007-05-07 20:42:03 +02:00
|
|
|
Bus::findBlockSize(int id)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
if (cachedBlockSizeValid)
|
|
|
|
return cachedBlockSize;
|
|
|
|
|
2009-06-05 08:21:12 +02:00
|
|
|
unsigned max_bs = 0;
|
2007-05-22 08:36:09 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2007-08-10 22:14:01 +02:00
|
|
|
PortIter p_end = portMap.end();
|
|
|
|
for (PortIter p_iter = portMap.begin(); p_iter != p_end; p_iter++) {
|
MEM: Introduce the master/slave port sub-classes in C++
This patch introduces the notion of a master and slave port in the C++
code, thus bringing the previous classification from the Python
classes into the corresponding simulation objects and memory objects.
The patch enables us to classify behaviours into the two bins and add
assumptions and enfore compliance, also simplifying the two
interfaces. As a starting point, isSnooping is confined to a master
port, and getAddrRanges to slave ports. More of these specilisations
are to come in later patches.
The getPort function is not getMasterPort and getSlavePort, and
returns a port reference rather than a pointer as NULL would never be
a valid return value. The default implementation of these two
functions is placed in MemObject, and calls fatal.
The one drawback with this specific patch is that it requires some
code duplication, e.g. QueuedPort becomes QueuedMasterPort and
QueuedSlavePort, and BusPort becomes BusMasterPort and BusSlavePort
(avoiding multiple inheritance). With the later introduction of the
port interfaces, moving the functionality outside the port itself, a
lot of the duplicated code will disappear again.
2012-03-30 15:40:11 +02:00
|
|
|
unsigned tmp_bs = masterPorts[p_iter->second]->peerBlockSize();
|
2007-05-07 20:42:03 +02:00
|
|
|
if (tmp_bs > max_bs)
|
|
|
|
max_bs = tmp_bs;
|
|
|
|
}
|
2007-08-10 22:14:01 +02:00
|
|
|
SnoopIter s_end = snoopPorts.end();
|
|
|
|
for (SnoopIter s_iter = snoopPorts.begin(); s_iter != s_end; s_iter++) {
|
2009-06-05 08:21:12 +02:00
|
|
|
unsigned tmp_bs = (*s_iter)->peerBlockSize();
|
2007-05-07 20:42:03 +02:00
|
|
|
if (tmp_bs > max_bs)
|
|
|
|
max_bs = tmp_bs;
|
|
|
|
}
|
2009-06-05 08:21:12 +02:00
|
|
|
if (max_bs == 0)
|
2007-05-07 20:42:03 +02:00
|
|
|
max_bs = defaultBlockSize;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (max_bs != 64)
|
|
|
|
warn_once("Blocksize found to not be 64... hmm... probably not.\n");
|
|
|
|
cachedBlockSize = max_bs;
|
|
|
|
cachedBlockSizeValid = true;
|
|
|
|
return max_bs;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006-11-02 01:00:49 +01:00
|
|
|
unsigned int
|
|
|
|
Bus::drain(Event * de)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
//We should check that we're not "doing" anything, and that noone is
|
|
|
|
//waiting. We might be idle but have someone waiting if the device we
|
|
|
|
//contacted for a retry didn't actually retry.
|
2012-03-22 11:37:21 +01:00
|
|
|
if (!retryList.empty() || (curTick() < tickNextIdle &&
|
|
|
|
busIdleEvent.scheduled())) {
|
2006-11-02 01:00:49 +01:00
|
|
|
drainEvent = de;
|
|
|
|
return 1;
|
|
|
|
}
|
2007-09-05 23:12:41 +02:00
|
|
|
return 0;
|
2006-11-02 01:00:49 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2007-06-10 08:01:47 +02:00
|
|
|
void
|
|
|
|
Bus::startup()
|
|
|
|
{
|
2011-01-08 06:50:29 +01:00
|
|
|
if (tickNextIdle < curTick())
|
|
|
|
tickNextIdle = (curTick() / clock) * clock + clock;
|
2007-06-10 08:01:47 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2007-07-24 06:51:38 +02:00
|
|
|
Bus *
|
|
|
|
BusParams::create()
|
2006-03-26 00:31:20 +01:00
|
|
|
{
|
2007-08-30 21:16:59 +02:00
|
|
|
return new Bus(this);
|
2006-03-26 00:31:20 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|