It is feasible to set up a compiler for assembly language and an assembler in such a way that a pipeline is exposed to the least amount of danger imaginable. One of the goals of pipeline design is to do this. To reach the highest possible level of productivity, do all assemblers and compilers rearrange the instructions that are delivered in assembly language in the same way?

It is feasible to set up a compiler for assembly language and an assembler in such a way that a pipeline is exposed to the least amount of danger imaginable. One of the goals of pipeline design is to do this. To reach the highest possible level of productivity, do all assemblers and compilers rearrange the instructions that are delivered in assembly language in the same way?

Name: It is feasible to set up a compiler for assembly language and an assem
Uploaded: 2024-03-20T06:51:23.000Z
Channel: Bartleby
Description: It is feasible to set up a compiler for assembly language and an assembler in such a way that a pipeline is exposed to the least amount of danger imaginable. One of the goals of pipeline design is to do this. To reach the highest possible level of pr

Systems Architecture

7th Edition

ISBN:9781305080195

Author:Stephen D. Burd

Publisher:Stephen D. Burd

Chapter4: Processor Technology And Architecture

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 26VE: _____ is a CPU design technique in which instruction execution is divided into multiple stages and...

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

If a microprocessor has a cycle time of 0.5 nanoseconds, what’s the processor clock rate? If the fetch cycle is 40% of the processor cycle time, what memory access speed is required to implement load operations with zero wait states and load operations with two wait states?
Compilers and assemblers have the ability to reorder assembler instructions in order to avoid pipeline dangers to the fullest degree that is practically possible. How similar or how unlike are the approaches used by assemblers and compilers when reordering instructions in assembly language?
It is feasible to design compilers and assemblers to sequence instructions in assembly language in a way that minimizes hazards in a pipeline. Do all assemblers and compilers optimize the order of instructions in assembly language in the same way?
It is feasible to make modifications to the instructions given by the assembler in order to lessen the risk that is provided by the pipeline. Is there a difference in the way that assemblers and compilers structure the instructions for assembly language?
Assembler instructions may be rearranged by compilers and assemblers to minimize pipeline hazards to the greatest extent feasible. To what extent do assemblers and compilers reorder instructions in the assembly language in the same way?
It is feasible for compilers and assemblers to be built to sequence assembly language instructions in a pipeline in a way that poses the fewest dangers. To achieve optimal efficiency, do all assemblers and compilers rearrange assembly language instructions in the same way?
The order in which assembly language instructions are executed may be programmed into compilers and assemblers so that pipelines are put in the most risk-free position possible. Pipeline design should aim to achieve this as one of its aims. In order to achieve the highest possible level of productivity, do all assemblers and compilers sequence the instructions for assembly language in the same fashion?
Writing compilers and assemblers that rearrange assembly language instructions to minimize pipeline hazards is a way to optimize them. When reordering assembly language instructions, do all assemblers and compilers perform the same optimizations?
It is feasible to set up a pipeline with the least amount of vulnerability using an assembly-language compiler and an assembler. This is one of the goals of pipeline design. When given assembly language code, do all assemblers and compilers reorder the instructions in the same way to maximize efficiency?
It is feasible to create compilers and assemblers that optimize the reordering of assembly language instructions in order to minimize pipeline risks. When reordering assembly language instructions, do all compilers and assemblers use the same optimization techniques?
Compilers and assemblers can be programmed to sequence assembly language instructions in a way that poses the least risk to a system's pipelines. In fact, achieving this is a primary focus when planning a pipeline. Is it true that all assemblers and compilers rearrange the order of assembly language instructions in the same way?
It's possible to write compilers and assemblers that rearrange assembly language instructions such that a pipeline has as few dangers as possible. Do all assemblers and compilers rearrange assembly language instructions in the same manner to achieve maximum efficiency?