This application is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 17/588,315, filed Jan. 30, 2022, and entitled “Microprocessor with Time Counter for Statically Dispatching Instructions,” which application is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety, and which application is assigned to the assignee of the present application.
The present invention relates to the field of computer processors. More particularly, it relates to issuing and executing instructions based on a time count in a processor where the processor consists of a general-purpose microprocessor, a digital-signal processor, a single instruction multiple data processor, a vector processor, a graphics processor, or other type of microprocessor which executes instructions.
Processors have become increasingly complex chasing small increments in performance at the expense of power consumption and semiconductor chip area. The approach in out-of-order (OOO) superscalar microprocessors has remained basically the same for the last 25-30 years, with much of the power dissipation arising from the dynamic scheduling of instructions for execution from the reservation stations or central windows. Designing an OOO superscalar microprocessor is a huge undertaking. Hundreds of instructions are issued to the execution pipeline where the data dependencies are resolved and arbitrated for execution by a large number of functional units. The result data from the functional units are again arbitrated for the write buses to write back to the register file. If the data cannot be written back to the register file, then the result data are kept in temporary registers and a complicated stalling procedure is performed for the execution pipeline.
An alternative to OOO superscalar processors is very-long-instruction-word (VLIW) processors. These have diminished interest in the industry because of the need for a complex compiler and relatively weak performance.
The latency of a processor's load instruction is often the determining factor in performance due to the high frequency of load instructions and that is it has the longest latency in the instruction set. Typically, the load instruction has priority in the execution pipeline of the microprocessor. Load dependent instructions also typically have priority for execution as soon as the load data are available. The load latency time is a function of data cache hit rate. Typically, load dependent instructions are speculatively scheduled for execution based on the expected load latency time. If the load data is not in the data cache (data cache miss), then the speculative scheduled instruction must be replayed. The replay can be selective for the dependent load instructions or can be for all instructions after the load with data cache miss. The latter case is simpler in implementation but with lower performance. The former case, i.e., selective replay, adds much more complexity to the dynamic scheduling of a traditional OOO superscalar microprocessor.
Thus, there is a need for a speculative execution microprocessor, including an OOO superscalar microprocessor, which consumes less power, has a simpler design, employs a simple mechanism for replaying of instructions, and is scalable with consistently high performance.
The disclosed embodiments provide a processor with a time counter and a method for statically dispatching instructions to an execution pipeline with preset execution times based on a time count from the counter. A source operand that is determined to be no longer valid may be retained in the execution queue for replay.
A disclosed approach to microprocessor design employs static scheduling of instructions. A disclosed static scheduling algorithm is based on the assumption that a new instruction has a perfect view of all previous instructions in the execution pipeline, and thus it can be scheduled for execution at an exact time in the future, e.g., with reference to a time count from a counter. Assuming an instruction has 2 source operands and 1 destination operand, the instruction can be executed out-of-order when conditions are met of (1) no data dependency, (2) availability of read buses to read data from the register file, (3) availability of a functional unit to execute the instruction, and (4) availability of a write bus to write result data back to the register file.
All the above requirements are associated with time: (1) a time when all data dependencies are resolved, (2) at which time the read buses are available to read source operands from a register file, (3) at which subsequent time the functional unit is available to execute the instruction, and (4) at which further subsequent time the write bus is available to write result data back to the register file.
In one embodiment a time counter increments periodically, for example, every clock cycle, and the resulting count is used to statically schedule instruction execution. Instructions have known throughput and latency times, and thus can be scheduled for execution based on the time count. For example, an add instruction with throughput and latency time of 1 can be scheduled to execute when any data dependency is resolved. If the time count is 5 and the add has no data dependency at time 8, then the available read buses are scheduled to read data from the register file at time 8, the available arithmetic logic unit (ALU) is scheduled to execute the add instruction at time 9, and the available write bus is scheduled to write result data from ALU to the register file at time 10. The read buses, the ALUs, and the write buses are the resources represented in a time-resource matrix in which the number of available resources is decremented at the usage times. The latency time of the load instructions is based on the data cache hit latency. The data cache hit rate is typically about 80-90% meaning that the write back times of some load instructions are different than the preset latency time. In another embodiment, the latency time for accessing level-2 (L2) cache memory is used to update the write back time of the load instruction. In addition, multiple load instructions can have data bank conflict by accessing the same data cache data bank. The data cache is often implemented with static-random access memory (SRAM) array which allows single access per clock cycle. The data bank conflict adds extra clock cycles to the load latency time. If the load data are delayed, then the exact delay time is known by L2 cache latency or by using the data bank delay time.
In one embodiment, a register scoreboard is used to keep track of the write back time of destination registers for all instructions including the load instruction. If the write back time is delayed, then the register scoreboard is updated with a new write back time. When the instruction is dispatched from the execution queue to the functional unit, the register scoreboard is read again. If the write-back time is delayed, dispatch logic determines that a source operand will not be valid. The dispatch logic causes the instruction to remain in the execution queue and to be replayed at a later time based on the new write-back time.
In one embodiment a processor includes a time counter which stores a time count incremented every clock cycle representing a current time of the processor, a time-resource matrix to indicate what resources are available at every time count, an instruction issue unit for receiving a first instruction and issuing the first instruction with a preset execution time based on the time count and the availability of the needed resources, and an execution queue for receiving the first instruction from the instruction unit and dispatching the first instruction to a functional unit when the preset execution time is the same as the time count. Since the preset time of an instruction can be modified because of the change in load delay time, the entry for the first instruction in the execution queue remains valid until the preset time can be confirmed or modified with the new preset time.
Aspects of the present invention are best understood from the following description when read with the accompanying figures.
The following description provides different embodiments for implementing aspects of the present invention. Specific examples of components and arrangements are described below to simplify the explanation. These are merely examples and are not intended to be limiting. For example, the description of a first component coupled to a second component includes embodiments in which the two components are directly connected, as well as embodiments in which an additional component is disposed between the first and second components. In addition, the present disclosure repeats reference numerals in various examples. This repetition is for the purpose of clarity and does not in itself require an identical relationship between the embodiments.
In one embodiment a processor is provided, typically implemented as a microprocessor, that schedules instructions to be executed at a preset time based on a time count from a time counter. In such a microprocessor the instructions are scheduled to be executed using the known throughput and latency of each instruction to be executed. For example, in one embodiment, the ALU instructions have throughput and latency times of 1, the multiply instructions have throughput time of 1 and the latency time of 2, the load instructions have the throughput time of 1 and latency time of 3 (based on a data cache hit), and the divide instruction have throughput and latency times of 32.
According to an embodiment the microprocessor 10 also includes a time counter unit 90 which stores a time count incremented, in one embodiment, every clock cycle. The time counter unit 90 is coupled to the clock unit 15 and uses “clk” signal to increment the time count.
In one embodiment the time count represents the time in clock cycles when an instruction in the instruction issue unit 55 is scheduled for execution. For example, if the current time count is 5 and an instruction is scheduled to be executed in 22 cycles, then the instruction is sent to the execution queue 70 with the execution time count of 27. When the time count increments to 26, the execution queue 70 issues the instruction to the functional unit 75 for execution in next cycle (time count 27). The time counter unit 90 is coupled to the register scoreboard 40, the time-resource matrix 50, the read control 62, the write control 64, and the plurality of execution queues 70. The scoreboard 40 resolves data dependencies in the instructions. The time-resource matrix 50 checks availability of the various resources which in one embodiment include the read buses 66, the functional units 75, the load-store unit 80, and the write buses 68. The read control unit 62, the write control unit 64, and the execution queues 70 receive the corresponding scheduled times from the instruction issue unit 55. The read control unit 62 is set to read the source operands from the register file 60 on specific read buses 66 at a preset time. The write control unit 64 writes the result data from a functional unit 75 or the load-store unit 80 or the data cache 85 to the register file 60 on a specific write bus 68 at a preset time discussed below. The execution queue 70 is set to dispatch an instruction to a functional unit 75 or the load-store unit 80 at a preset time. In each case, the preset time is the time setup by the instruction decode unit 30. The preset time is a future time based on the time count, so when the time count counts up to the future preset time, then the specified action will happen, where the specified action is reading data from the register file 60, writing data to the register file 60, or issuing an instruction to a functional unit 75 for execution. The instruction issue unit 55 determines that the instruction is free of any data dependency and the resources are available to set the “preset times” for the instruction to be executed in the execution pipeline.
In the microprocessor system 10 the instruction fetch unit 20 fetches the next instruction(s) from the instruction cache 24 to send to the instruction decode unit 30. One or more instructions can be fetched per clock cycle from the instruction fetch unit 20 depending on the configuration of microprocessor 10. For higher performance, an embodiment of microprocessor 10 fetches more instructions per clock cycle for the instruction decode unit 30. For low-power and embedded applications, an embodiment of microprocessor 10 might fetch only a single instruction per clock cycle for the instruction decode unit 30. If the instructions are not in the instruction cache 24 (commonly referred to as an instruction cache miss), then the instruction fetch unit 20 sends a request to external memory (not shown) to fetch the required instructions. The external memory may consist of hierarchical memory subsystems, for example, an L2 cache, an L3 cache, read-only memory (ROM), dynamic random-access memory (DRAM), flash memory, or a disk drive. The external memory is accessible by both the instruction cache 24 and the data cache 85. The instruction fetch unit 20 is also coupled with the branch prediction unit 22 for prediction of the next instruction address when the branch is detected and predicted by the branch prediction unit 22. The instruction fetch unit 20, the instruction cache 24, and the branch prediction unit 22 are described here for completeness of a microprocessor 10. In other embodiments, other instruction fetch and branch prediction methods can be used to supply instructions to the instruction decode unit 30 for microprocessor 10.
The instruction decode unit 30 is coupled to the instruction fetch unit 20 for new instructions, and also coupled to the register scoreboard 40. The instruction decode unit 30 decodes the instructions to determine instruction type, instruction throughput and latency times, and the register operands.
The register operands, as an example, may consist of 2 source operands and 1 destination operand. The operands are referenced to registers in the register file 60. The source and destination registers are used here to represent the source and destination operands of the instruction. The source registers support solving read-after-write (RAW) data dependencies. If a later instruction has the same source register as the destination register of an earlier instruction, then the later instruction has RAW data dependency. The later instruction must wait for completion of the earlier instruction before it can start execution. The register scoreboard 40 is used to keep track of the completion time of the destination registers of the earlier instructions and hence keep a time entry for each destination register for all pending instructions in the execution pipeline. In the preferred embodiment the completion time is maintained in reference to the time count 90.
Each of the units shown in the block diagram of
The integrated circuitry employed to implement the units shown in the block diagram of
In other embodiments, the units shown in the block diagrams of the various figures can be implemented as software representations, for example in a hardware description language (such as for example Verilog) that describes the functions performed by the units described herein at a Register Transfer Level (RTL) type description. The software representations can be implemented employing computer-executable instructions, such as those included in program modules and/or code segments, being executed in a computing system on a target real or virtual processor. Generally, program modules and code segments include routines, programs, libraries, objects, classes, components, data structures, etc. that perform particular tasks or implement particular abstract data types. The program modules and/or code segments may be obtained from another computer system, such as via the Internet, by downloading the program modules from the other computer system for execution on one or more different computer systems. The functionality of the program modules and/or code segments may be combined or split between program modules/segments as desired in various embodiments. Computer-executable instructions for program modules and/or code segments may be executed within a local or distributed computing system. The computer-executable instructions, which may include data, instructions, and configuration parameters, may be provided via an article of manufacture including a non-transitory computer readable medium, which provides content that represents instructions that can be executed. A computer readable medium may also include a storage or database from which content can be downloaded. A computer readable medium may also include a device or product having content stored thereon at a time of sale or delivery. Thus, delivering a device with stored content, or offering content for download over a communication medium may be understood as providing an article of manufacture with such content described herein.
The aforementioned implementations of software executed on a general-purpose, or special purpose, computing system may take the form of a computer-implemented method for implementing a microprocessor, and also as a computer program product for implementing a microprocessor, where the computer program product is stored on a non-transitory computer readable storage medium and includes instructions for causing the computer system to execute a method. The aforementioned program modules and/or code segments may be executed on suitable computing system to perform the functions disclosed herein. Such a computing system will typically include one or more processing units, memory and non-transitory storage to execute computer-executable instructions.
The write time of a destination register is the read time for the subsequent instruction with RAW data dependency on the same destination register. Referring back to
An instruction reads source operand data at read time, executes the instruction with a functional unit 75 at execute time, and writes the result data back to the register file 60 at write time. The write time is recorded in the write time field 46 of the register scoreboard 40. With 2 source registers, the instruction selects the later write time from the register scoreboard 40 as the read time for the instruction. The execute time is the read time plus 1 time count where the functional unit 75 or the load-store unit 80 starts executing the instruction. The write time of the instruction is the read time plus the instruction latency time. If the instruction latency time is 1 (e.g., an ALU instruction), then the write time and execution time of the instruction are the same.
Each instruction has an execution latency time. For example, the add instruction has a latency time of 1, the multiply instruction has a latency time of 2, and the load instruction has a latency time of 4 assuming a data cache hit. In another example, if the current time count is 5 and the source registers of an add instruction receive write time counts of 22 and 24 from the register scoreboard 40, then the read time count is set at 24. In this case, the execution and the write time counts are both 25 for the add instruction. As shown in
The read buses column 51 corresponds to the plurality of read buses 66 in
In one embodiment, each resource represented in the time-resource matrix 50 is implemented as an independent register file where the number of entries is the same as the time counter 90, and each entry consists of a resource count. The issue or replay instruction accesses individual resources as needed, instead of accessing all resources in the time-resource matrix.
The availability of all resources for the required times are read by the instruction issue unit 55 from the time-resource matrix 50 and sent to the instruction issue unit 55 for a decision of when to issue an instruction to the execution queue 70. If the resources are available at the required times, then the instruction can be scheduled and sent to the execution queue 70. The issued instruction updates the register scoreboard 40 with the write time and updates the time-resource matrix 50 to reduce the available resource values. All resources must be available at the required time counts for the instruction to be dispatched to the execution queue 70. If all resources are not available, then the required time counts for the instruction in question are incremented by one, and the time-resource matrix 50 is checked as soon as the same cycle or next cycle. The particular number of read buses 66, write buses 68, and functional units 75 in
In the example illustrated in
Note that the destination register can be, but does not need to be, kept with the instruction. The write control unit 64 is responsible for directing the result data from a functional unit 75 to a write bus 68 to write to the register file 60. The execution queues 70 are only responsible for sending instructions to the functional units 75 or the load-store unit 80. The read time field 77 which has the read time of the instruction is synchronized with the read control unit 62. When the read time 77 is the same as the time count 90 as detected by the comparators 78, the instruction is issued to the functional units 75 or the load-store unit 80. For the example in
In an embodiment, the steps for executing an instruction from the instruction decode unit 30 of the microprocessor 10 are: (1) decoding the instructions in instruction decode unit 30 for operand registers, instruction type, latency and throughput times, (2) accessing the register scoreboard 40 for RAW data dependency in which the worst case write time 46 of the register scoreboard 40 is the read time of the instruction and the execution and write times are calculated, (3) accessing the time-resource matrix 50 for availability of the read port(s), the functional unit, and write port based on the read, execution, and write times to set the read port control 62, write port control 64, and to dispatch an instruction to an execution queue 70, (4) the execution queue 70 dispatches an instruction to a functional unit 75, and the read port control 62 accesses the register file 60 to read source operand data and the register scoreboard 40 to confirm data from the register file 60 or to forward data from a functional unit 75 or to replay the instruction where all information is processed by the dispatch logic 170 to determine if the instruction is to be replayed, (5) if the instruction is not replayed, then it is executed in one functional unit 75 or load-store unit 80 and produced result data at the expected write time, (6) the write port control 64 accesses the register scoreboard 40 to ensure that the write time 46 has not been delayed, resets the valid bit 42 of the destination register, and uses the functional unit 44 to write the result data from the functional unit 75 or the load-store unit 80 to the register file 60. If the result data is not written by the load-store unit 80 at the expected write time to the register file 60, then the load data can be delayed by data cache miss or data bank conflict. In this example, the instruction can be replayed in step (4) as determined by the dispatch logic 170 of the execution queue 70 or step (6) and the entry in the execution queue 70 remains valid and sets replay bit 172 along with many other bits in the execution queue 70 as shown in
The first entry of
In one embodiment, an execution queue 70 dispatches instructions to multiple functional units 75 at the same time. For example, an execution queue 70 may be coupled to multiple ALU functional units 75. The time-resource matrix 50 assigns the ALU functional units in-order to the issue instructions. Similarly, the time-resource matrix 50 assigns the replay ALU functional units in-order to the replay instructions. The time-resource matrix 50 keeps the issue and replay ALU functional units separate to avoid conflict between the issue and replay instructions. The issue and replay ALU functional units may be numbered continuously such as 0-3 for 4 issue ALUs and 4-5 for 2 replay ALUs. The execution queue 70 does not distinguish the ALU type and can dispatches 6 instructions to 6 ALU functional units.
The second entry of
The third entry of
In an embodiment, each functional unit 75 has its own execution queue 70. In another embodiment, an execution queue 70 dispatches instructions to multiple functional units 75. In this case, another field (not shown) can be added to the execution queue 70 to indicate the functional unit number for dispatching of instructions.
Referring back to
The foregoing explanation described features of several embodiments so that those skilled in the art may better understand the scope of the invention. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that they may readily use the present disclosure as a basis for designing or modifying other processes and structures for carrying out the same purposes and/or achieving the same advantages of the embodiments herein. Such equivalent constructions do not depart from the spirit and scope of the present disclosure. Numerous changes, substitutions and alterations may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention.
Although illustrative embodiments of the invention have been described in detail with reference to the accompanying drawings, it is to be understood that the invention is not limited to those precise embodiments, and that various changes and modifications can be affected therein by one skilled in the art without departing from the scope of the invention as defined by the appended claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5021985 | Hu et al. | Jun 1991 | A |
5185868 | Tran | Feb 1993 | A |
5187796 | Wang et al. | Feb 1993 | A |
5251306 | Tran | Oct 1993 | A |
5497467 | Wakui et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
5655096 | Branigin | Aug 1997 | A |
5689653 | Karp et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5699536 | Hopkins | Dec 1997 | A |
5799163 | Park et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5802386 | Kahle | Sep 1998 | A |
5809268 | Chan | Sep 1998 | A |
5835745 | Sager et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5860018 | Panwar | Jan 1999 | A |
5881302 | Omata | Mar 1999 | A |
5903779 | Park | May 1999 | A |
5903919 | Myers | May 1999 | A |
5958041 | Petolino, Jr. | Sep 1999 | A |
5961630 | Zaidi | Oct 1999 | A |
5964867 | Anderson et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5996061 | Lopez-Aguado et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5996064 | Zaidi | Nov 1999 | A |
6016540 | Zaidi | Jan 2000 | A |
6035393 | Glew et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6065105 | Zaidi | May 2000 | A |
6247113 | Jaggar | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6282634 | Hinds et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6304955 | Arora | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6425090 | Arimilli | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6453424 | Janniello | Sep 2002 | B1 |
7069425 | Takahashi | Jun 2006 | B1 |
7434032 | Coon et al. | Oct 2008 | B1 |
8166281 | Gschwind et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
9256428 | Heil | Feb 2016 | B2 |
10339095 | Moudgill et al. | Jul 2019 | B2 |
11062200 | Lie et al. | Jul 2021 | B2 |
11132199 | Tran | Sep 2021 | B1 |
11144319 | Battle et al. | Oct 2021 | B1 |
11163582 | Tran | Nov 2021 | B1 |
11204770 | Tran | Dec 2021 | B2 |
11263013 | Tran | Mar 2022 | B2 |
11467841 | Tran | Oct 2022 | B1 |
11829187 | Tran | Nov 2023 | B2 |
11829762 | Tran | Nov 2023 | B2 |
11829767 | Tran | Nov 2023 | B2 |
11954491 | Tran | Apr 2024 | B2 |
12001848 | Tran | Jun 2024 | B2 |
12061906 | Stephens et al. | Aug 2024 | B2 |
20010004755 | Levy et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20030023646 | Lin et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030135712 | Theis | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20040073779 | Hokenek et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040236920 | Sheaffer | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20050251657 | Boucher | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20060010305 | Maeda et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060095732 | Tran et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060218124 | Williamson | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060259800 | Maejima | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060288194 | Lewis | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070038984 | Gschwind et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070255903 | Tsadik et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070260856 | Tran et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20090158279 | Iino et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20110099354 | Takashima et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110153987 | Luke et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110320765 | Karkhanis et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120047352 | Yamana | Feb 2012 | A1 |
20120060015 | Eichenberger et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120151156 | Citron et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20130151816 | Indukuru et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130297912 | Tran et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130346985 | Nightingale | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20140059328 | Gonion | Feb 2014 | A1 |
20140082626 | Busaba et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20150026435 | Muff et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150100754 | Reid et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150212972 | Boettcher et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
20150227369 | Gonion | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20160092238 | Codrescu et al. | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160275043 | Grochowski et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160283240 | Mishra et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160371091 | Brownscheidle | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20170177345 | Ould-Ahmed-Vall et al. | Jun 2017 | A1 |
20170177354 | Ould-Ahmed-Vall | Jun 2017 | A1 |
20170357513 | Ayub | Dec 2017 | A1 |
20170371657 | Mahurin et al. | Dec 2017 | A1 |
20180181400 | Scherbinin et al. | Jun 2018 | A1 |
20180196678 | Thompto | Jul 2018 | A1 |
20180253310 | Stephens | Sep 2018 | A1 |
20190079764 | Diamond et al. | Mar 2019 | A1 |
20190243646 | Anderson | Aug 2019 | A1 |
20200004534 | Gurram et al. | Jan 2020 | A1 |
20200004543 | Kumar et al. | Jan 2020 | A1 |
20200319885 | Eyole et al. | Oct 2020 | A1 |
20200387382 | Tseng et al. | Dec 2020 | A1 |
20210026639 | Tekmen | Jan 2021 | A1 |
20210311743 | Tran | Oct 2021 | A1 |
20210326141 | Tran | Oct 2021 | A1 |
20210389979 | Tran | Dec 2021 | A1 |
20220066760 | Chang et al. | Mar 2022 | A1 |
20230068637 | Feiste et al. | Mar 2023 | A1 |
20230244490 | Tran | Aug 2023 | A1 |
20230244491 | Tran | Aug 2023 | A1 |
20230367599 | Waterman et al. | Nov 2023 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0840213 | May 1998 | EP |
0902360 | Mar 1999 | EP |
0959575 | Nov 1999 | EP |
0010076 | Feb 2000 | WO |
0208894 | Jan 2002 | WO |
0213005 | Feb 2002 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Choi, W., Park, SJ., Dubois, M. (2009). Accurate Instruction Pre-scheduling in Dynamically Scheduled Processors. In: Stenstrom, P. (eds) Transactions on High-Performance Embedded Architectures and Compilers I. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5470 Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. pp. 107-127. (Year: 2009). |
Diavastos, Andreas & Carlson, Trevor. (2021). Efficient Instruction Scheduling using Real-time Load Delay Tracking. (Year: 2021). |
J. S. Hu, N. Vijaykrishnan and M. J. Irwin, “Exploring Wakeup-Free Instruction Scheduling,” 10th International Symposium on High Performance Computer Architecture (HPCA'04), Madrid, Spain, pp. 232-232 (Year: 2004). |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, PCT/S2022/052185. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, PCT/US2023/018970. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, PCT/US2023/018996. |
PCT/US23/27497: Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority. |
PCT/US2023/018996, Written Opinion of the International Preliminary Examining Authority, Apr. 8, 2024. |
PCTUS2023081682, Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, Mar. 22, 2024. |
Written Opinion of The International Preliminary Examining Authority, PCTUS2023/018970, Mar. 25, 2024. |
PCT/US2023/018996, International Preliminary Report on Patentability, Jul. 19, 2024. |
PCT/US2023/018970, International Preliminary Report on Patentability, Jul. 18, 2024. |
Anonymous: “RISC-V—Wikipedia”, Apr. 16, 2022 (Apr. 16, 2022), XP093142703, Retrieved from the Internet: URL:https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=RISC-V&oldid=1083030760 [retrieved on Sep. 9, 2024]. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20230315474 A1 | Oct 2023 | US |