# Tag Info

0

This is an example of a pipelined architecture. You mainly put register files (which introduce some delays) to save data from one stage to another. Think of it like assembling a car, the chasis is done in one stage then it waits (in our case storage is the Register File (RF) then it goes for the other stage... To implement pipelining properly, you need to ...

0

If every complete operation takes one cycle, then pipelining using the same cycle time won't give you any advantage whatsoever. What you would do is to split up each operation in various parts. First you make the cycle say four times shorter, so now each operation executes in four cycles. Then you split each operation into say five parts, and you have a ...

0

(For a) & b), my take is $2^{16}$ of whatever are addressable units - the bus size not being an indication (see e.g. Intel 8086↔8088). It does not read 16 address lines/signals, nor does it mention address multiplexing. Implementations not supplying a signal for every architectural address bit are somewhat common: physical address space may be smaller (...

0

for part c I think the answer could be the use of an expansion bus

0

It's simple - 32 bit word size, or 32 bit architecture, mean exactly what the person using the expression means. No more, no less. You can't draw any conclusions from it. For example, there's an Intel 32 bit architecture that can address 64 GB of physical RAM, and no Intel 64 bit architecture that can address anything near 2^64 bytes of physical or virtual ...

2

Ignore recursion for the moment, and pretend that a recursive call is just like any other call. Then the solution is easy: all local variables are spilled to the stack across calls, including the recursive call. So yes, if there is deep recursion going on, most of the local variables will reside on the stack most of the time. Every platform (operating ...

0

The minimum that you need is zero registers. And there have been actual computers with zero registers. The most popular Pascal compiler (UCSD-Pascal) generated "p-code" which used zero registers; it was usually interpreted, but there was actually a hardware implementation.

1

You need to make your question a bit more precise. First, regarding your request to avoid "unlimited" registers -- I assume you mean registers that can hold an arbitrary value (e.g., any natural number). If you a-priori bound your registers, then the possible states your machine can be in is finite. That is, you have a deterministic finite automaton (or ...

Top 50 recent answers are included