Why are jump instructions bad when we talk about cpu pipelining? Group of answer choices A. Jump instructions introduce bugs into our architecture and is what causes a segmentation fault. B. Jump instructions are illegal by x86_64 processes. C. Jump instructions may cause us to 'flush' the pipeline of all of the previous instructions that we have prefetched. This means that all of the prior work we have anticipated must be thrown away, and we do not get the increased throughput that pipelining offers.

Why are jump instructions bad when we talk about cpu pipelining? Group of answer choices A. Jump instructions introduce bugs into our architecture and is what causes a segmentation fault. B. Jump instructions are illegal by x86_64 processes. C. Jump instructions may cause us to 'flush' the pipeline of all of the previous instructions that we have prefetched. This means that all of the prior work we have anticipated must be thrown away, and we do not get the increased throughput that pipelining offers.

Systems Architecture

7th Edition

ISBN:9781305080195

Author:Stephen D. Burd

Publisher:Stephen D. Burd

Chapter4: Processor Technology And Architecture

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 10RQ: How does pipelining improve CPU efficiency? What’s the potential effect on pipelining’s efficiency...

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Is it possible to achieve piplelined execution if the execution time of pipeline instruction execution is not balanced? What inefficiency do you see here?
10. Q1 : What is an atomic instruction? Show that if the wait operation is not executed atomically, then mutual exclusion may be violated Q2: What is spinlock? Discuss the advantage and disadvantage of using spinlock. Why do you think Solaris, Linux, and Windows 2000 use spinlocks as a synchronization mechanism only on multiprocessor systems and not on single- processor systems?
It is possible to program compilers and assemblers to order assembly language instructions so that a pipeline is exposed to the least amount of risk possible. One of the objectives of pipeline design is this. Do all assemblers and compilers rearrange instructions written in assembly language in the same manner to achieve the highest level of productivity?
Is it still feasible to accomplish pipelined execution even if the time it takes to execute pipeline instructions is not balanced? Where can you perceive the inefficiencies in this situation?
The answer to this question is still "yes," even if the time required to execute pipeline instructions differs. Is there a way to recognize the flaws in this plan of action?
How would it be advantageous to prioritize the I/O queue above the process execution queue? What will happen if the I/O is interrupted is anyone's guess. Indications are conflicting as to how this could effect the maximum burst rate of the CPU. I'm confused as to the nature of your question.
It is possible to design compilers and assemblers to order assembly language instructions such that a pipeline is exposed to the least amount of risk possible. One of the objectives of pipeline design is this. Do all assemblers and compilers rearrange instructions provided in assembly language in the same manner to achieve the best degree of productivity?
Give an explanation as to why it is not feasible to continually add more and more cores to a CPU in order to boost its performance and keep up with the growth of Moore's Law?
What are the two main steps involved in an instruction cycle? If the CPU needs to be alerted by the keyboard and the mouse at the same time, How the CPU will handle interrupts from the keyboard and the mouse at the same time? There are two ways... Which cache mapping does not need a replacement algorithm? Which cache mapping scheme has the largest TAG? Only a microprocessor is accessing the memory via cache i.e. no other device is reading from memory. Which cache write the policy will you use and why.
Suppose that the execution time of a given program on a single processor is 9.5 ms. If you run this program on a system having 18 independent processors, you observe an overall speedup of 1.1. Using Amdahl’s Law, what must have been the fraction of the program that could be executed in parallel? (Express the answer in decimal form, i.e., if 50% of the program can be enhanced, enter 0.5. Round to three decimal places)
Suppose on a non-pipelined single-processor machine, you have the following breakdown: alu instructions make up 25% of the dynamic instruction count, and take 2 cycles to execute. Load/store instructions take 10 cycles to execute and make up 30% of the mix. Jumps take 4 cycles and make up 15%. All other instructions average 1.5 cycles. a. What is the average CPI? b. Suppose the architecture above is pipelined. If there are no stalls for any reason, what is the new CPI? c. If, for the architecture described in questions a and b, Load/store instructions generate 2 stalls on average, alu 0.2 stalls, and jumps cause 1 stall, what is the actual pipelined cpi?
For the following assembly code that is vaguely MIPS-like, trace its execution in both the R3000 and R4000 pipelines using a Gantt chart (or table of some kind).LOAD R1, Memory(12340)LOAD R2, Memory(12350)ADD R3, R1, R2 // R3 = R1 + R2ADD R3, R3, R3 // R3 = R3 + R3STORE R3, Memory(12360) I know other students have posted similar questions and they are answered, but those answers do not seem correct to me, so please do not copy from them.