What is the use of the 'share' label? If there is an outstanding read request to read X on bus when p1 wants to read X, p1 just need to listen for the response to appear on the bus. It seems that the 'share' label does nothing.
Faust
I don't think that the share label is actually necessary. It is just a way to demonstrate on the request table that p1 is also listening for the response to appear on the bus.
afa4
I am not sure if a processor can revoke its outstanding request from the request table. If it can, then we will need the 'share' label to retain the entry in case P2 decides to revoke its request.
Sherry
I think p1 should be in the request table as requestor (just beside p2).
What is the use of the 'share' label? If there is an outstanding read request to read X on bus when p1 wants to read X, p1 just need to listen for the response to appear on the bus. It seems that the 'share' label does nothing.
I don't think that the share label is actually necessary. It is just a way to demonstrate on the request table that p1 is also listening for the response to appear on the bus.
I am not sure if a processor can revoke its outstanding request from the request table. If it can, then we will need the 'share' label to retain the entry in case P2 decides to revoke its request.
I think p1 should be in the request table as requestor (just beside p2).