Appeal No. 2003-0376
Application 09/364,281
this group. With respect to representative claim 1, the examiner
essentially finds that the reconfiguration mode disclosed by
Walter teaches the claimed invention except that Walter does not
disclose a hashing circuit that assigns an address hash of
addresses associated with instructions within a plurality of data
streams. The examiner cites Eberhard as teaching the generation
of hashed virtual addresses from address operands. The examiner
finds that it would have been obvious to the artisan to include
the hashing circuit of Eberhard in the reconfiguration mode of
Walter because assigning an active task set a numerical value so
that it can be associated with a particular node performs the
same function as allocating to each node an active task set
through a reconfiguration algorithm [Final Rejection mailed April
11, 2002, incorporated into answer at page 3].
Appellants argue that neither applied reference discloses
the claimed hashing circuit or the hashing selection circuit.
Appellants argue that even if Eberhard were to be combined with
Walter, the combination would still not disclose the hashing
circuit as specifically set forth in claim 1. Appellants also
argue that an address is not employed to allocate tasks to nodes
in Walter. Appellants note that Eberhard relates only to an
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007