Most operating systems use interface interrupts to schedule network tasks. Interrupt-driven systems can provide low overhead and good latency at low of-fered load, but degrade significantly at higher arrival rates unless care is taken to prevent several pathologies. These are various forms of receive livelock, in which the system spends all its time processing interrupts, to the exclusion of other neces-sary tasks. Under extreme conditions, no packets are delivered to the user application or the output of the system. To avoid livelock and related problems, an operat-ing system must schedule network interrupt handling as carefully as it schedules process execution. We modified an interrupt-driven networking implemen-tation to do so; this eliminates receive livelock without degrading other aspects of system performance. We present measurements demonstrating the success of our approach. 1.

We have investigated the register file requirements of dynamically scheduled processors using register renaming and dispatch queues running the SPEC92 benchmarks. We looked at processors capable of issuing either four or eight instructions per cycle and found that in most cases implementing precise exceptions requires a relatively small number of additional registers compared to imprecise exceptions. Systems with aggressive non-blocking load support were able to achieve performance similar to processors with perfect memory systems at the cost of some additional registers. Given our machine assumptions, we found that the performance of a four-issue machine with a 32-entry dispatch queue tends to saturate around 80 registers. For an eight-issue machine with a 64-entry dispatch queue performance does not saturate until about 128 registers. Assuming the machine cycle time is proportional to the register file cycle time, the 8-issue machine yields only 20% higher performance than the 4-issue machine due in part...