SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

DEPARTMENT OF
COMPUTER SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING

CS642E06-SYSTEM SOFTWARE CIA- 1

Component 2

Case Study on

“UltraSPARC
Architecture and AIX assemblers”

Submitted by,

Rishikesh Raj 2160390

Subject In-Charge
NATRAJAN K

Department of Computer Science and

Engineering School of Engineering and
Technology,
CHRIST (Deemed to Be University),
Kumbalgodu, Bangalore - 560074.
1. Identification of Main Issues / Problems

1. Performance Optimization Hurdles:

 Analysis: The intricate nature of the UltraSPARC architecture introduces
formidable obstacles in efficiently optimizing performance.
 Impact: The complexities involved in performance optimization contribute to
an underutilization of the processor's full capabilities, limiting the overall
efficiency of computing tasks.
2. Compatibility Challenges:
 Analysis: The process of migrating software across diverse architectures
encounters significant hurdles in the UltraSPARC environment.
 Impact: Compatibility issues act as roadblocks to seamless software
portability, demanding additional resources and effort to ensure
cross-platform functionality, impeding the overall development and
deployment process.
3. Heat Dissipation and Power Consumption Concerns:
 Analysis: The UltraSPARC processors exhibit elevated power consumption
and generate substantial heat during operation.
 Impact: The heightened power demands necessitate substantial cooling
infrastructure, resulting in increased operational costs and potentially impacting the
overall environmental sustainability of systems utilizing UltraSPARC architecture. 4.
Limited Software Ecosystem:
 Analysis: The UltraSPARC architecture may face limitations in terms of a
diverse and extensive software ecosystem compared to more mainstream
architectures.  Impact: A constrained software environment can impede the
availability of
applications and tools, potentially limiting the functionality and versatility of
systems relying on UltraSPARC processors.
5. Complex Development and Debugging:
 Analysis: The intricacies of the UltraSPARC architecture may complicate the
 development and debugging processes for software developers.
 Impact: Limited support and availability of updates can pose risks for
systems relying on UltraSPARC processors, potentially resulting in security
vulnerabilities and reduced access to advancements in hardware and software
technologies. 6. Vendor Support and Longevity:
 Analysis: The specialized nature of UltraSPARC architecture may create
adoption barriers, especially in environments where compatibility with
mainstream technologies is prioritized.
 Impact: Reluctance or challenges in adopting UltraSPARC architecture may
limit its integration into broader computing ecosystems, potentially
isolating systems based on this architecture from evolving industry
standards.

7. Scalability Challenges:
 Analysis: Achieving optimal scalability in systems utilizing UltraSPARC
architecture may pose challenges, especially in scenarios where dynamic
resource allocation is critical.
 Impact: Difficulty in scaling systems based on UltraSPARC architecture
could limit their ability to adapt to varying workloads efficiently, potentially
affecting performance in environments with fluctuating computational
demands.

AIX Assemblers:

1. Platform Dependency:
 Analysis: AIX assembler code may be closely tied to the underlying
hardware architecture, making it less portable across different platforms.
 Impact: Limited portability can hinder the deployment of software in diverse
computing environments, requiring additional effort for adaptation and
potentially limiting the reach of applications.
2. Resource Intensive Compilation Process:
 Analysis: Compiling AIX assembler code may be resource-intensive,
consuming considerable time and computational resources.
 Impact: Prolonged compilation times can impede the development
workflow, affecting the agility of development teams and potentially leading
to delays in project timelines.
3. Limited High-Level Abstraction:
 Analysis: AIX assembler, being a low-level language, may lack high-level
abstractions compared to more modern programming languages.
 Impact: Developers may face challenges expressing complex algorithms in
a concise and readable manner, potentially leading to code that is harder
to understand, maintain, and troubleshoot.
4. Dependency on Platform-Specific Features:
 Analysis: AIX assembler may rely on platform-specific features, tying the
code tightly to the underlying hardware architecture.
 Impact: Dependence on platform-specific features can result in code that is
less adaptable to changes in hardware, limiting the flexibility and
future-proofing of software written in AIX assembler.
5. Security Challenges:
 Analysis: AIX assembler code may be more prone to security vulnerabilities
compared to higher-level languages with built-in security features.
 Impact: Increased susceptibility to security threats can pose risks to the
integrity and confidentiality of software systems, necessitating additional
measures and resources for security audits and mitigations.

6. Limited Community and Documentation:

 Analysis: The AIX assembler community and documentation may be
relatively smaller compared to more widely used programming languages.
 Impact: Developers may encounter challenges in finding support,
 resources, and up-to-date documentation, potentially slowing down
problem resolution and knowledge sharing within the developer
community.
2. Analysis and Evaluation of the Problems Identified

UltraSPARC Architecture:
Performance Optimization:
 Evaluation: Thorough examination of the sequential phases reveals
a need for constant monitoring and refinement throughout the
software development life cycle to ensure sustained performance
improvements.
 Recommendation: Implement a continuous performance monitoring
and feedback loop to iteratively refine the architecture based on
real-world usage patterns.
Compatibility Enhancement:
 Evaluation: The detailed requirements gathering and testing phases
demonstrate a proactive approach to compatibility issues.
 Recommendation: Regularly update compatibility criteria based on
industry standards and emerging technologies to maintain the
adaptability of UltraSPARC architecture in a rapidly evolving
computing landscape.
Energy Efficiency Focus:
 Evaluation: The comprehensive approach to research, design, and
testing phases reflects a commitment to energy-efficient
architecture.
 Recommendation: Continue investing in research for cutting-edge
energy efficient technologies and collaborate with industry partners
to stay at the forefront of advancements in cooling systems.
AIX Assemblers:
Enhanced Extensibility:
  Evaluation: The structured phases for requirements analysis and
deployment suggest a methodical approach to enhancing extensibility.
 Recommendation: Foster collaboration with the developer
community to gather insights on potential extensions, ensuring that
the architecture remains adaptable to evolving requirements.
Developer Support:
 Evaluation: The emphasis on detailed documentation and training
programs indicates a commitment to supporting developers.
 Recommendation: Establish a feedback mechanism to continuously
improve documentation based on developer experiences and
address evolving training needs.
Tooling Improvement:
 Evaluation: The methodical phases for tool research, development,
testing, and deployment highlight an awareness of the importance
of debugging and maintenance tools.
 Recommendation: Regularly assess emerging tools and
technologies to ensure that the tooling infrastructure remains
aligned with best practices and industry standards, promoting
efficiency in development and maintenance processes.

2. Recommendation of Effective Solutions / Strategies:

The requirements for the First Phase of the UltraSPARC Architecture
Improvement 1. Performance Analysis:
In-Depth Profiling: Utilize advanced profiling tools and benchmarking
techniques to conduct a comprehensive analysis of task performance
within the UltraSPARC architecture. Identify specific tasks that consume
significant CPU time and pinpoint existing bottlenecks to inform targeted
improvement efforts.
2. Compatibility Evaluation:
 Source Code Examination: Conduct a thorough examination of the
software source code to identify architecture-specific dependencies and
potential challenges that may arise during migration to different platforms.
Evaluate compatibility with existing libraries and external dependencies to
ensure seamless portability.
3. Energy Efficiency Research:
 Power Usage Measurements: Implement measurements of power
consumption to gauge the energy usage patterns within the UltraSPARC
architecture. This involves assessing how different components contribute
to overall power consumption.
 Thermal Analysis: Conduct a detailed thermal analysis to identify areas
within the architecture that may be susceptible to overheating. This
analysis will aid in determining regions that could benefit from energy
optimization, including improvements in cooling systems.
4. Workload Distribution Assessment:
 Task Prioritization: Evaluate the distribution of workloads across the
architecture to identify tasks with varying computational demands.
Prioritize tasks based on their impact on overall system performance to
guide optimization efforts effectively.
5. Concurrency Analysis:
 Parallelization Opportunities: Conduct an analysis to identify tasks that can
be parallelized to leverage the UltraSPARC architecture's parallel
processing capabilities. Explore opportunities for concurrency to enhance
overall system efficiency.
6. User Experience Metrics:
 User-Centric Performance Metrics: Integrate metrics that reflect the
end-user experience into the analysis. This includes assessing factors
such as response time, latency, and overall system responsiveness to
ensure improvements align with user expectations.
7. Documentation Review:
  Documentation Assessment: Review existing documentation related to the
UltraSPARC architecture, ensuring that it accurately reflects the current
state and potential improvements. Update documentation to align with any
architectural changes made during the performance analysis phase.
8. Stakeholder Collaboration:
 Feedback Collection: Engage with stakeholders, including developers and
end users, to collect feedback on performance issues and potential areas
for improvement. Collaborate closely with the user community to
incorporate valuable insights into the enhancement process.
9. Risk Assessment:
 Identify Potential Risks: Conduct a risk assessment to identify potential
challenges and obstacles that may arise during the improvement process.
Develop mitigation strategies to address these risks proactively.
10. Cost-Benefit Analysis:
 Economic Viability Study:: Perform a cost-benefit analysis to evaluate the
economic feasibility of proposed improvements. Assess the anticipated
benefits against the associated costs to ensure a favorable return on
investment.
Crafting
1. Performance Optimization Design:
 Cache Enhancement Strategies: Propose architectural modifications,
including advanced cache upgrade strategies, to optimize data retrieval,
reduce latency, and enhance the overall efficiency of the system.
 Pipelining Refinements: Recommend optimizations within the instruction
pipeline, focusing on refining pipelining processes to improve instruction
throughput, minimize execution time, and bolster overall performance.
 Instruction Set Augmentations: Suggest additions to the instruction set of
the UltraSPARC architecture to better align with specific computational
tasks, thereby enhancing computational efficiency and expediting
execution.
2. Compatibility-Centric Design:
 Abstraction Layer Development: Devise and implement an abstraction layer
or middleware equipped with standardized interfaces. This layer aims to
streamline program interoperability across diverse platforms, providing a
framework that mitigates architecture-specific complexities during
transitions and fosters compatibility.
3. Energy-Efficient Architecture Design:
 Power-Optimized Circuitry: Propose a redesign of architecture components
to incorporate power-efficient circuitry, aimed at minimizing energy
consumption during regular operation.
 Voltage Scaling Mechanisms: Advocate for the implementation of dynamic
voltage scaling mechanisms, allowing for optimized power usage tailored to
varying workloads and promoting energy savings during periods of reduced
demand.
 Adaptive Cooling System Integration: Suggest the incorporation of adaptive
cooling systems responsive to real-time thermal analysis. Such systems
can efficiently manage cooling where needed, thereby reducing overall
heat production and promoting energy efficiency.
4. Parallelization Integration:
 Effective Multi-Core Utilization: Recommend enhancements to the
architecture to ensure optimal utilization of multi-core processing
capabilities. This involves strategically distributing tasks across cores for
parallel execution, leading to improved overall system performance.
 Task Parallelism Support: Propose the introduction of features supporting
task parallelism, allowing for concurrent execution of independent tasks
and maximizing resource utilization.
5. Pipeline Efficiency Improvements:
 Optimized Pipeline Depth: Suggest an analysis and adjustment of
instruction pipeline depth to strike a balance between throughput and
latency, ensuring the efficient execution of instructions.
  Enhanced Branch Prediction Mechanisms: Advocate for improvements in
branch prediction mechanisms within the architecture to reduce instruction
pipeline stalls, thereby enhancing overall processing speed.
6. Advanced Error Handling Mechanisms:
 Fault-Tolerant Design Integration: Propose the integration of fault-tolerant
mechanisms within the architecture to minimize the impact of errors,
ensuring continued system operation and bolstering overall reliability.
7. Resource Allocation Optimization:
 Dynamic Resource Allocation Strategies: Recommend the development of
mechanisms for dynamic resource allocation, enabling the adaptive
distribution of resources based on evolving computational demands.
8. Feedback-Driven Design Approach:
 Iterative Design Framework: Suggest the establishment of an iterative
design framework that incorporates feedback from performance
monitoring tools. This iterative approach ensures ongoing refinement
based on real-world usage patterns and evolving requirements, fostering a
responsive and adaptive architecture.

Putting into action

Performance Optimization Implementation:

Hardware Description Languages (HDLs) or Microcode Upgrades: Implement
proposed architectural changes using HDLs or microcode upgrades.
Compatibility Enhancement Implementation:
Platform-Independent Frameworks or Wrappers: Develop frameworks or wrappers
to abstract architecture-specific capabilities for seamless program interoperability.
Energy-Efficient Designs Implementation:
Hardware Modifications or Firmware Updates: Incorporate energy-saving features
into UltraSPARC processors through hardware modifications or firmware updates.
Iterative Implementation:
  Continuous Improvement: Adopt an iterative approach for ongoing refinement
based on real-world feedback and evolving requirements.
 Regular Firmware Maintenance: Schedule regular firmware maintenance for
updates addressing emerging energy efficiency challenges.
Testing and Validation:
 Comprehensive Testing: Prioritize thorough testing for performance, compatibility,
and energy efficiency benchmarks.
 User Feedback Integration: Encourage user feedback to refine implemented
features and address unforeseen issues.
Examining

1. Testing of the Performance: Benchmarks, simulations, and stress tests should be

carried out in order to evaluate the effect that the changes that have been made
have had on the speed and throughput of the CPU.

2. Performing Compatibility Tests: In order to validate the portability and

interoperability of software, it is necessary to do cross-architecture testing
utilising automated test suites.

3. The Evaluation of Energy Efficiency: It is necessary to carry out thermal testing

and measurements of power consumption in order to validate the efficiency of the
implementation of energy-efficient design processes.

The deployment of

1. The implementation of the optimized architecture: Immediately following the

completion of exhaustive evaluation and verification, deploy upgraded processors
or firmware fixes to production environments.

2. Software Compatibility Deployment Procedures: Disseminate updated software

 versions that are compatible with the new abstraction layer or middleware in order
to guarantee that the product can be used on multiple platforms.

3. System Deployment That Is Efficient with Energy: Within the context of data
centres or hardware settings, the installation and configuration of adaptive
cooling systems or power management modules is required.
To keep up with

1. Monitoring of Performance and Preventative Maintenance: Maintain constant

monitoring of the system's performance metrics and make any necessary
adjustments or optimizations when they become necessary.

2. For the Maintenance of Compatibility: Ensure that the abstraction layer or

middleware is regularly updated in order to fit the ever-changing software
requirements and to keep compatibility intact.

3. Management of Energy Efficiency Practices: Make adjustments to cooling methods

or algorithms that save electricity based on real-time data regarding power usage
and thermal data in order to achieve continuous gains in efficiency.
Second Phase: Improvement of AIX Assemblers
Requirements Gathering:
1. Extensibility Requirement Analysis:
 Identification of Key Enhancements: Uncover crucial improvements
necessary in the assembler architecture, providing the foundation for
accommodating additional instruction sets or extensions.
 Assessment of Scalability Needs: Evaluate the scalability requirements to
ensure that the extensibility improvements can efficiently scale with growing
demands. 2. Developer Support Needs Identification:
 Tooling Evaluation and Enhancement: Conduct a comprehensive review of
existing tooling, identifying areas for enhancement to better support
 developers in their AIX assembly code endeavors.
 Documentation Clarity and Accessibility: Enhance documentation to not only
meet but exceed the clarity and accessibility expectations of developers,
providing a valuable resource for efficient code development and
debugging.
Design and Development:
3. Enhanced Extensibility Design:
 Modular Assembler Architecture: Establish a modular assembler
architecture, enabling the seamless integration of new instruction sets or
syntax through modular components.
 Extension Framework Flexibility: Design extension frameworks that offer a
flexible plug-in architecture, allowing for dynamic management and
integration of new functionalities.
4. Developer Support Tool Development:
 User-Centric IDE Plugins: Develop IDE plugins that prioritize user
experience, offering intuitive features that enhance the development and
debugging process for AIX assembly code.
 Real-Time Debugging Extensions: Create debugging extensions that
provide real time insights into code execution, facilitating a more efficient
debugging experience for developers.
Testing:
5. Extensibility and Tooling Testing:
 Scenario-Based Testing: Conduct scenario-based testing to simulate
real-world conditions, ensuring that new assembler modules and
developer support tools perform reliably in diverse situations.
 User Acceptance Testing: Involve end-users in the testing process through
user acceptance testing to gather feedback on usability and effectiveness.
Deployment:
6. Implementation of Enhanced Assemblers:
 User Training and Adoption Strategies: Accompany the release of updated
 assemblers with user training sessions and adoption strategies to ensure a
smooth transition and optimal utilization of new features.
7. Developer Support Tools Deployment:
 Collaborative Developer Rollout: Foster collaboration with developers during
the rollout of updated plugins, encouraging feedback and incorporating
user suggestions for continual improvement.
Continuous Maintenance:
8. Ongoing Support and Updates:
 Proactive Bug Monitoring: Implement proactive bug monitoring and
resolution strategies, addressing issues before they impact users and
maintaining a robust and reliable development environment.
 User Feedback Channels: Establish user feedback channels, encouraging
developers to provide insights and suggestions for ongoing refinement and
feature enhancement.
Adaptation to Industry Changes:
 Technology Watch and Integration: Implement a technology watch program to stay
abreast of industry changes, integrating relevant advancements to keep the
assemblers and developer support tools contemporary and competitive.
 Agile Development Practices: Embrace agile development practices, fostering
agility in responding to evolving industry standards and user needs while
ensuring continuous improvement and innovation.

5. Recommendations:
Recommendations for UltraSPARC Architecture Improvement:
a. Holistic Performance Optimization:
 Comprehensive Profiling: Employ advanced profiling tools to conduct
a thorough analysis, identifying specific CPU-intensive tasks and
bottlenecks within the UltraSPARC architecture.
 Sequential Optimization Phases: Implement a phased approach for
performance optimization, including architectural analysis, design
 improvements, implementation, rigorous testing, and ongoing
maintenance. This ensures a holistic and systematic enhancement
process.
b. Compatibility Enhancement:
 Abstraction Layer Implementation: Develop and integrate abstraction
layers that abstract architecture-specific complexities, addressing
compatibility challenges. This layer facilitates seamless migration
and cross-platform functionality.
 Detailed Compatibility Testing: Conduct exhaustive compatibility
testing to validate the effectiveness of abstraction layers and ensure
smooth software portability across different architectures.
c. Energy Efficiency Focus:
 Research-Driven Design: Invest in comprehensive research to
design energy-efficient architecture, including modifications to
circuits and cooling systems.
 Deployment of Energy-Efficient Features: Implement hardware
modifications or firmware updates to incorporate energy-saving
features into UltraSPARC processors, reducing power consumption
and operational costs.
d. Extensive Testing Protocols:
 Unit Testing and Integration Testing: Prioritize thorough unit testing
and integration testing to validate the stability and correctness of
new architectural features, compatibility enhancements, and
energy-efficient components.
 Real-world Scenario Testing: Conduct real-world scenario-based
testing to simulate diverse usage conditions and ensure the
robustness of the implemented improvements.
e. Continuous Monitoring and Iterative Upgrades:
 Proactive Monitoring: Establish a continuous monitoring system to
track performance metrics and identify potential issues in real-time.
  Iterative Upgrade Cycles: Implement an iterative upgrade strategy
based on ongoing performance evaluations, user feedback, and
emerging technological advancements to ensure the UltraSPARC
architecture stays at the forefront of efficiency and performance.
f. User Training and Documentation:
 Training Programs: Develop comprehensive training programs for
users and developers to ensure they can leverage the enhanced
features and capabilities of the improved UltraSPARC architecture
effectively.
 Detailed Documentation: Provide detailed documentation for
developers, system administrators, and end-users to facilitate a
smooth transition and optimal utilization of the upgraded
architecture.
g. Collaborative Development Approach:
 Engage with Developer Community: Foster collaboration with the
developer community, encouraging feedback and suggestions for
continuous improvement.
 Open Channels for Feedback: Establish open channels for user
feedback, creating a collaborative environment where insights from
users contribute to the refinement of the UltraSPARC architecture.
By implementing these recommendations, organizations can embark on a
comprehensive journey towards optimizing performance, ensuring compatibility,
enhancing energy efficiency, and fostering a collaborative and adaptive development
environment for the UltraSPARC architecture.

6. Conclusion:
In navigating the intricacies posed by the UltraSPARC architecture and AIX
Assemblers, an exhaustive and systematic approach becomes the linchpin for
success. This holistic strategy entails a nuanced analysis, strategic design
interventions, precise implementation, and an ongoing monitoring framework to
ensure sustained efficiency in the face of evolving challenges.
In the realm of the UltraSPARC architecture, where the imperatives span
performance optimization, compatibility enhancement, and energy efficiency, a
meticulous sequence of actions is indispensable. Commencing with a thorough
analysis, facilitated by advanced profiling tools, allows for the identification of
CPU-intensive tasks and bottlenecks, providing a solid foundation for subsequent
improvements. The heart of the solution lies in the thoughtful design of
architectural enhancements, crafting compatibility abstraction layers, and
implementing energy-efficient circuits or cooling mechanisms. The subsequent
phases, including implementation, rigorous testing, and deployment, are pivotal in
validating and ensuring the efficacy of the proposed solutions. Continuous
monitoring, coupled with a proactive maintenance strategy and timely upgrades,
contributes to the long
term resilience and adaptability of the UltraSPARC architecture.
Turning attention to AIX Assemblers, recognizing the critical needs for enhanced
extensibility, robust developer support, and refined tooling forms the bedrock of
improvement initiatives. A structured approach begins with a comprehensive
requirement gathering phase, segues into the design of extensible assembler
modules, and extends into the creation of supportive tools. Rigorous testing
protocols, including user acceptance testing, ensure the seamless integration of
improvements, and a methodical deployment process sets the stage for
enhanced functionality. The ongoing support, manifested through regular
updates, patches, and bug fixes, becomes indispensable for maintaining the
optimal
performance and functionality of the assembler and associated tools. In
conclusion, the challenges embedded in complex architectures and development
tools necessitate not only strategic solutions but also an unwavering commitment
to ongoing evaluation and adaptation. By implementing the recommended
strategies in phased sequences, organizations can not only overcome existing
challenges but also proactively stay ahead of evolving technological demands.
 This iterative, forward-looking approach ensures sustained efficiency and
adaptability across both hardware and software domains, fostering an
environment of continual improvement and technological resilience.
7. REFERENCES
1. M. Tremblay, D. Greenley and K. Normoyle, "The design of the microarchitecture
of UltraSPARC-I," in Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 83, no. 12, pp. 1653-1663,
Dec. 1995, doi: 10.1109/5.476081.
URL:
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=476081&isnumber=1
0 194
2. T. Horel and G. Lauterbach, "UltraSPARC-III: designing third-generation 64-bit
performance," in IEEE Micro, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 73-85, May-June 1999, doi:
10.1109/40.768506.
URL:
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=768506&isnumber=1
6 651
3. R. Yung, "Design decisions influencing the UltraSPARC's instruction fetch
architecture," Proceedings of the 29th Annual IEEE/ACM International
Symposium on Microarchitecture. MICRO 29, Paris, France, 1996, pp. 178-190,
doi: 10.1109/MICRO.1996.566460.
URL:
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=566460&isnumber=1
2 304
4. Huang, J. Gao, C. Feng and M. Zhang, "Optimization techniques of on-chip
memory system based on UltraSPARC architecture," 2009 Asia Pacific
Conference on Postgraduate Research in Microelectronics & Electronics
(PrimeAsia), Shanghai, China, 2009, pp. 428-431, doi:
10.1109/PRIMEASIA.2009.5397354.
URL:
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5397354&isnumber=
 5 397340
5. M. Shah et al., "UltraSPARC T2: A highly-treaded, power-efficient, SPARC SOC,"
2007 IEEE Asian Solid-State Circuits Conference, Jeju, Korea (South), 2007, pp.
22-25, doi: 10.1109/ASSCC.2007.4425786.
URL:
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=4425786&isnumber=
4 425677
6. Parulkar, T. Ziaja, R. Pendurkar, A. D'Souza and A. Majumdar, "A scalable, low
cost design-for-test architecture for UltraSPARC/spl trade/ chip multi-processors,"
Proceedings. International Test Conference, Baltimore, MD, USA, 2002, pp.
726-735, doi: 10.1109/TEST.2002.1041825.
URL:
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=1041825&isnumber=
2 2329
7. M. Shah et al., "UltraSPARC T2: A highly-treaded, power-efficient, SPARC SOC,"
2007 IEEE Asian Solid-State Circuits Conference, Jeju, Korea (South), 2007, pp.
22-25, doi: 10.1109/ASSCC.2007.4425786.
URL:
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=4425786&isnumber=
4 425677

8.
https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=25832af3ed30
d37242 96e450d06ee71480d40c24
9.
https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=03a762b771c7
fea2daa c14d1f77bf803f0c1ada3
10. https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/165123.165153
11. https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/223982.224439
12.
https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=6afe5319630d
966c13 55f3812f9d4b4b4d6d9fd0