Dear Ismail,
On Fri, 6 May 2011, ismail wrote:
TinySTM 1.0 uses implicit transaction descriptor by default (same as
0.9.9) but you can compile it with EXPLICIT_TX_PARAMETER (Makefile) and
then the transaction descriptor is explicit.
But functions are the same from 0.9.9 to 1.0.0 so I don't really see the
problem.
--- Yes . thanks for update , I remembered . Also I wrote the version wrong it is
"0.9.0b1 release". There should be a parameter like EXPLICIT_TX_PARAMETER in
trans-mem. Did you need a kind of parameter
--- while compiling the trans-mem branch ? For example to use trans-mem to
transactify LeeTM (I am especially talking about the MEMSET and MEMCPY funcs.
of trans-mem do not have transaction identifier while accessing to the mem.).
--- I am currently using the explicit function calls when I need transaction
identifier as the following.
Humm... libitm is always using implicit transaction descriptor and there
is no such flag as in TinySTM.
Don't confuse transaction descriptor and transaction identifier.
I think it is better to use always implicit transaction descriptor it
avoids the burden to manage it.
--- I tried to get transaction handler which does not ---have explicit
---descriptor where another function needs transaction ---descriptor as
---a parameter.
Hummm... which one has explicit tx descriptor?
All ITM functions are using implicit transaction descriptor as far as I
remember, otherwise it is a bit odd.
Patrick.
