Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Computer Organization and Architecture 10th Edition Stallings Solutions Manual
Computer Organization and Architecture 10th Edition Stallings Solutions Manual
Computer Organization and Architecture 10th Edition Stallings Solutions Manual
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
2.1 ■ Pipelining: The execution of an instruction involves multiple stages of
operation, including fetching the instruction, decoding the opcode,
fetching operands, performing a calculation, and so on.
■ Branch prediction: The processor looks ahead in the instruction code
fetched from memory and predicts which branches, or groups of
instructions, are likely to be processed next.
■ Superscalar execution: This is the ability to issue more than one
instruction in every processor clock cycle.
■ Data flow analysis: The processor analyzes which instructions are
dependent on each other’s results, or data, to create an optimized
schedule of instructions.
■ Speculative execution: Using branch prediction and data flow analysis,
some processors speculatively execute instructions ahead of their actual
appearance in the program execution, holding the results in temporary
locations.
2.3 Multicore: the use of multiple processing units, called cores, on a single
chip.
Many integrated core (MIC): a chip containing a large number (50 or
more) cores.
General-purpose computing on GPUs (GPGPU): A GPU designed to
support a broad range of applications.
2.4 Amdahl's law deals with the potential speedup of a program using
multiple processors compared to a single processor. The law indicates
the amount of speedup as a function of the fraction of code that can be
executed in parallel.
-10-
© 2016 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved.
2.10 ■Base metric: These are required for all reported results and have
strict guidelines for compilation. In essence, the standard compiler
with more or less default settings should be used on each system
under test to achieve comparable results.
■Peak metric: This enables users to attempt to optimize system
performance by optimizing the compiler output.
■Speed metric: This is simply a measurement of the time it takes to
execute a compiled benchmark.
■Rate metric: This is a measurement of how many tasks a computer
can accomplish in a certain amount of time; this is called a
throughput, capacity or rate measure.
ANSWERS TO PROBLEMS
2.1 CPI = 1.55; MIPS rate = 25.8; Execution time = 3.87 ms.
-11-
© 2016 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved.
2.2 a.
CPIA =
∑ CPI × I = (8 ×1+ 4 × 3 + 2 × 4 + 4 × 3) ×10
i i
6
≈ 2.22
Ic (8 + 4 + 2 + 4 ) ×10 6
f 200 ×10 6
MIPSA = = = 90
CPIA ×10 6 2.22 ×10 6
Ic × CPIA 18 ×10 6 × 2.2
CPU A = = = 0.2 s
f 200 ×10 6
CPIB =
∑ CPI × I = (10 ×1+ 8 × 2 + 2 × 4 + 4 × 3) ×10
i i
6
≈ 1.92
Ic (10 + 8 + 2 + 4 ) ×10 6
f 200 ×10 6
MIPSB = = = 104
CPIB ×10 6 1.92 ×10 6
Ic × CPIB 24 ×10 6 ×1.92
CPU B = = = 0.23 s
f 200 ×10 6
2.3 a. We can express the MIPs rate as: [(MIPS rate)/106] = Ic/T. So that:
Ic = T × [(MIPS rate)/106]. The ratio of the instruction count of the
RS/6000 to the VAX is [x × 18]/[12x × 1] = 1.5.
b. For the Vax, CPI = (5 MHz)/(1 MIPS) = 5.
For the RS/6000, CPI = 25/18 = 1.39.
2.4 From Equation (2.3), MIPS = Ic/(T × 106) = 100/T. The MIPS values
are:
-12-
© 2016 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
principle of individuation. The Buddha thus wants an illumined will and
not the negation of it. When the will is illumined, and thereby when the
intellect is properly directed to follow its original course, we are
liberated from the fetters which are put upon us by wrong understanding,
and purified of all the defilements which ooze from the will not being
correctly interpreted. Enlightenment and emancipation are the two
central ideas of Buddhism.
The argument Aśvaghosha puts into the mouth of the Buddha against
Arada (or Ālāra Kālāma), the Samkhya philosopher, is illuminating in
this respect. When Arada told the Buddha to liberate the soul from the
body as when the bird flies from the cage or the reed’s stalk is loosened
from its sheath, which will result in the abandonment of egoism, the
Buddha reasons in the following way: “As long as the soul continues
there is no abandonment of egoism. The soul does not become free from
qualities as long as it is not released from number and the rest; therefore,
as long as there is no freedom from qualities, there is no liberation
declared for it. There is no real separation of the qualities and their
subject; for fire cannot be conceived apart from its form and heat. Before
the body there will be nothing embodied, so before the qualities there
will be no subject; how, if it was originally free, could the soul ever
become bound? The body-knower (the soul) which is unembodied, must
be either knowing or unknowing; if it is knowing, there must be some
object to be known, and if there is this object, it is not liberated. Or if the
soul be declared to be unknowing, then what use to you is this imagined
soul? Even without such a soul, the existence of the absence of
knowledge is notorious as, for instance, in a log of wood or a wall. And
since each successive abandonment is held to be still accompanied by
qualities, I maintain that the absolute attainment of our end can only be
f74
found in the abandonment of everything.”
As long as the dualistic conception is maintained in regard to the
liberation of the soul, there will be no real freedom as is truly declared
by the Buddha. “The abandonment of everything” means the
transcending of the dualism of soul and body, of subject and object, of
that which knows and that which is known, of “it is” and “it is not,” of
soul and soul-lessness; and this transcending is not attained by merely
negating the soul or the will, but by throwing light upon its nature, by
realising it as it is in itself. This is the act of the will. An intellectual
contemplation which is advocated by the Samkhya philosophers does not
lead one to spiritual freedom, but to the realm of passivity which is their
“realm of nothingness.” Buddhism teaches freedom and not annihilation,
it advocates spiritual discipline and not mental torpor or emptiness.
There must be a certain turning away in one’s ordinary course of life,
there must be a certain opening up of a new vista in one’s spiritual
outlook if one wants to be the true follower of the Buddha. His aversion
to asceticism and nihilism as well as to hedonism becomes intelligible
when seen in this light.
I
The legendary story of the origin of Zen in India runs as follows:
Śākyamuni was once engaged at the Mount of the Holy Vulture in
preaching to a congregation of his disciples. He did not resort to any
lengthy verbal discourse to explain his point, but simply lifted a bouquet
of flowers before the assemblage, which was presented to him by one of
his lay-disciples. Not a word came out of his mouth. Nobody understood
the meaning of this except the old venerable Mahākāśyapa, who quietly
smiled at the Master, as if he fully comprehended the purport of this
silent but eloquent teaching on the part of the Enlightened One. The
latter perceiving this opened his golden-tongued mouth and proclaimed
solemnly: “I have the most precious treasure, spiritual and
transcendental, which this moment I hand over to you, O venerable
[4.1]
Mahākāśyapa!”
Orthodox Zen followers generally blindly take this incident to be the
origin of their doctrine, in which, according to them, is disclosed the
inmost mind of the Buddha as well as the secret of the religion. As Zen
claims to be the inmost essence of Buddhism and to have been directly
transmitted by the Buddha to his greatest disciple, Mahākāśyapa, its
followers naturally look for the particular occasion when this
transmission took place between the master and the disciple. We know in
a general way that Mahākāśyapa succeeded the Buddha as the leader of
the Faith, but as to his special transmission of Zen, we have no historical
records in the Indian Buddhist writings at present in our possession. This
fact is however specially mentioned for the first time as far as we know
in a Chinese Zen history called The Records of the Spread of the Lamp,
[4.2]
compiled by Li Tsun-hsü, in 1029, and also in The Accounts of the
Orthodox Transmission of the Dharma compiled by Ch‘i-sung in 1064,
[4.3]
where this incident is only referred to as not quite an authentic one
historically. In The Records of the Transmission of the Lamp,[4.4] written
in 1004, which is the earliest Zen history now extant, the author does not
record any particular event in the life of the Buddha regarding the Zen
transmission. As all the earlier histories of Zen are lost, we have at
present no means to ascertain how early the Zen tradition started in
China. Probably it began to be talked about among the Zen followers
when their religion had been well established in China late in the eighth
century.
In those days there must have been some necessity to invent such a
legend for the authorisation of Zen Buddhism; for as Zen grew in
strength the other schools of Buddhism already in existence grew jealous
of its popular influence and attacked it as having no authorised records of
its direct transmission from the founder of Buddhism, which was
claimed by the devotees of Zen. This was the case especially when the
latter made so light of the doctrinal teaching discussed in the Sutras and
Śastras, as they thought that the ultimate authority of Zen issued out of
their own direct personal experience. In this latter they were quite
insistent; but they were not, nor could they be, so critical and
independent as to ignore altogether the authority of historical Buddhism,
and they wanted somehow to find the record that the Buddha handed Zen
over to Mahākāśyapa and from Mahākāśyapa on to the twenty-eighth
patriarch, Bodhi-Dharma, who became the first patriarch of Zen in
China. A line of twenty-eight Indian patriarchs thus came to be
established by Zen historians, while, according to other schools, there
were only twenty-three or twenty-four patriarchs after the founder. When
the historians had the need for the special transmission of Zen from the
Buddha to Mahākāśyapa, they felt it necessary to fill up the gap between
the twenty-third or twenty-fourth patriarch and Bodhi-Dharma himself,
who according to them was the twenty-eighth. From the modern critical
point of view, it did not matter very much whether Zen originated with
Bodhi-Dharma in China or with the Buddha in India, inasmuch as Zen is
true and has an enduring value. And again from the historian’s point of
view which tries scientifically to ascertain the source of development
resulting in Zen Buddhism, it is only important to find a logical
connection between the Mahayana Doctrine of Enlightenment in India
and its practical application by the Chinese to the actualities of life; and
as to any special line of transmission in India before Bodhi-Dharma as
was established by the Zen devotees, it is not a matter of much concern
nor of great importance. But as soon as Zen is formulated into an
independent system, not only with its characteristic features but with its
historically ascertainable facts, it will be necessary for the historians to
trace its line of transmission complete and not interrupted; for in Zen, as
we shall see later, it is of the utmost importance for its followers to be
duly certified or approved (abbhanumodana) by the master as to the
genuineness or orthodox character of their realisation. Therefore, as long
as Zen is the product of the Chinese soil from the Indian seed of
Enlightenment as I take it, no special line of transmission need be
established in India unless it is in a general logical manner such as was
attempted in my previous Essays.
The twenty-eight patriarchs of Zen regarded by its followers as the
orthodox line of transmission are as follows:
1. Śākyamuni.
2. Mahākāśyapa.
3. Ānanda.
4. Śaṇavāsa.
5. Upagupta.
6. Dhṛitaka.
7. Micchaka.
8. Buddhanandi.
9. Buddhamitra.
10. Bhikshu Parśva.
11. Puṇyayaśas.
12. Aśvaghosha.
13. Bhikshu Kapimala.
14. Nāgārjuna.
15. Kāṇadeva.
16. Ārya Rāhulata.
17. Saṁghanandi.
18. Saṁghayaśas.
19. Kumārata.
20. Jayata.
21. Vasubandhu.
22. Manura.
23. Haklenayaśas.
24. Bhikshu Siṁha.
25. Vāśasita.
26. Puṇyamitra.
27. Prajñātara.
28. Bodhi-Dharma.
The gāthā of the sixth Buddha, Kāśyapa, who just preceded the Muni
of the Śākyas, runs thus:
II
The history of Zen dates with the coming of Bodhi-Dharma (Bodai-
[4.19]
Daruma) from the west, 520 A.D. He came to China with a special
message which is summed up in the following lines: