mem: Make packet debug printing more uniform

Previously DPRINTFs printing information about a packet would use ad hoc
formats. This patch changes all DPRINTFs to use the print function
defined by the packet class, making the packet printing format more
uniform and easier to change.

Change-Id: Idd436a9758d4bf70c86a574d524648b2a2580970
Reviewed-by: Andreas Hansson <andreas.hansson@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Stephan Diestelhorst <stephan.diestelhorst@arm.com>

1 files changed, 9 insertions, 12 deletions

diff --git a/src/mem/snoop_filter.cc b/src/mem/snoop_filter.cc
index ec96f6e8c..e4ab1bd27 100755
--- a/src/mem/snoop_filter.cc
+++ b/src/mem/snoop_filter.cc
@@ -62,8 +62,8 @@ SnoopFilter::eraseIfNullEntry(SnoopFilterCache::iterator& sf_it)
 std::pair<SnoopFilter::SnoopList, Cycles>
 SnoopFilter::lookupRequest(const Packet* cpkt, const SlavePort& slave_port)
 {
-    DPRINTF(SnoopFilter, "%s: packet src %s addr 0x%x cmd %s\n",
-            __func__, slave_port.name(), cpkt->getAddr(), cpkt->cmdString());
+    DPRINTF(SnoopFilter, "%s: src %s packet %s\n", __func__,
+            slave_port.name(), cpkt->print());
 
     // check if the packet came from a cache
     bool allocate = !cpkt->req->isUncacheable() && slave_port.isSnooping() &&
@@ -176,8 +176,7 @@ SnoopFilter::finishRequest(bool will_retry, Addr addr, bool is_secure)
 std::pair<SnoopFilter::SnoopList, Cycles>
 SnoopFilter::lookupSnoop(const Packet* cpkt)
 {
-    DPRINTF(SnoopFilter, "%s: packet addr 0x%x cmd %s\n",
-            __func__, cpkt->getAddr(), cpkt->cmdString());
+    DPRINTF(SnoopFilter, "%s: packet %s\n", __func__, cpkt->print());
 
     assert(cpkt->isRequest());
 
@@ -238,9 +237,8 @@ SnoopFilter::updateSnoopResponse(const Packet* cpkt,
                                  const SlavePort& rsp_port,
                                  const SlavePort& req_port)
 {
-    DPRINTF(SnoopFilter, "%s: packet rsp %s req %s addr 0x%x cmd %s\n",
-            __func__, rsp_port.name(), req_port.name(), cpkt->getAddr(),
-            cpkt->cmdString());
+    DPRINTF(SnoopFilter, "%s: rsp %s req %s packet %s\n",
+            __func__, rsp_port.name(), req_port.name(), cpkt->print());
 
     assert(cpkt->isResponse());
     assert(cpkt->cacheResponding());
@@ -294,9 +292,8 @@ void
 SnoopFilter::updateSnoopForward(const Packet* cpkt,
         const SlavePort& rsp_port, const MasterPort& req_port)
 {
-    DPRINTF(SnoopFilter, "%s: packet rsp %s req %s addr 0x%x cmd %s\n",
-            __func__, rsp_port.name(), req_port.name(), cpkt->getAddr(),
-            cpkt->cmdString());
+    DPRINTF(SnoopFilter, "%s: rsp %s req %s packet %s\n",
+            __func__, rsp_port.name(), req_port.name(), cpkt->print());
 
     assert(cpkt->isResponse());
     assert(cpkt->cacheResponding());
@@ -332,8 +329,8 @@ SnoopFilter::updateSnoopForward(const Packet* cpkt,
 void
 SnoopFilter::updateResponse(const Packet* cpkt, const SlavePort& slave_port)
 {
-    DPRINTF(SnoopFilter, "%s: packet src %s addr 0x%x cmd %s\n",
-            __func__, slave_port.name(), cpkt->getAddr(), cpkt->cmdString());
+    DPRINTF(SnoopFilter, "%s: src %s packet %s\n",
+            __func__, slave_port.name(), cpkt->print());
 
     assert(cpkt->isResponse());