Appeal No. 1998-2661
Application 08/633,267
Before we leave our discussion of Kau, because
independent claim 1 does not recite any feature relating to
virtual rename buffers, the contribution of Kau per se also
reads on the claimed subject matter because of the
correspondence we indicated earlier. This includes our view
that the intermediate storage buffers 60 of Figure 3 of Kau
correspond to the claimed physical rename registers of this
claim.
We disagree with appellants' view expressed at page 7 as
to claim 1 that even if one were to make analogous the view of
equating the recited physical rename registers of claim 1 with
the storage buffers 60 taught in Kau, the reference teaches
away because appellants take the view that Kau only assigns a
storage buffer 60 to an instruction from an instruction
dispatcher 22 when the storage buffer is available to receive
a result. We do not read the Abstract, the Summary of the
invention and the discussion of the operation of Kau's system
between columns
5 through 7 in the manner urged by appellants. Indeed, it is
clear that a pre-assignment occurs before the result of an
given instruction is finally received in the intermediate and
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007