<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Performance Monitoring: Instruction cache in Software Archive</title>
    <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Performance-Monitoring-Instruction-cache/m-p/864487#M7870</link>
    <description>Hi everybody,&lt;BR /&gt;I'm a newbie, and its my first post here, so hope this is the right forum for asking my question (apologize if its wrong forum...)&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I am performing some performance monitoring on my Intel Core 2 Duo E 6550, my goal is to show if when disabling all caches (I-cache, L1 data cahce, L2 shared cache....) the execution time may become more predictable....I know that there are other parameters to take into account, but I decided to start by testing the influence of cache memories....&lt;BR /&gt;So, I've read the Intel Architecture Manual, and found out HOW to disable all caches...in breif, for L2 cache I am using a tool called MSRTool which allows me to set bit 9 and 16 in order to turn off the L2 caches. My PMT (Performance Monitoring Tool) is called PFMON (http://perfmon2.sourceforge.net/pfmon_usersguide.html) and it allowed me to check that L2 Data cache was really disabled...and PFMON showed that there were neither L2 data cache misses nor L2 cahce hit anymore.&lt;BR /&gt;Well, Now I decided to disable L1 Instruction cache, and Intel Architecture Manual says that this may be done by setting bit 30 of CR0 (Control register 0). I think it really did disable L1 I-cache because my computer started to run slower.&lt;BR /&gt;The problem is that when I check it with PFMON, it seems to remain turned on...there is still L1 instruction cache misses and hits.&lt;BR /&gt;Anybody knows how this could be possible? I think that I've just turned off one part of the cache, and some other is still working, but I cant explain how?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;thank you for your answer!&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Ouali.&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2009 08:10:56 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>ouali</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2009-09-23T08:10:56Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Performance Monitoring: Instruction cache</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Performance-Monitoring-Instruction-cache/m-p/864487#M7870</link>
      <description>Hi everybody,&lt;BR /&gt;I'm a newbie, and its my first post here, so hope this is the right forum for asking my question (apologize if its wrong forum...)&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I am performing some performance monitoring on my Intel Core 2 Duo E 6550, my goal is to show if when disabling all caches (I-cache, L1 data cahce, L2 shared cache....) the execution time may become more predictable....I know that there are other parameters to take into account, but I decided to start by testing the influence of cache memories....&lt;BR /&gt;So, I've read the Intel Architecture Manual, and found out HOW to disable all caches...in breif, for L2 cache I am using a tool called MSRTool which allows me to set bit 9 and 16 in order to turn off the L2 caches. My PMT (Performance Monitoring Tool) is called PFMON (http://perfmon2.sourceforge.net/pfmon_usersguide.html) and it allowed me to check that L2 Data cache was really disabled...and PFMON showed that there were neither L2 data cache misses nor L2 cahce hit anymore.&lt;BR /&gt;Well, Now I decided to disable L1 Instruction cache, and Intel Architecture Manual says that this may be done by setting bit 30 of CR0 (Control register 0). I think it really did disable L1 I-cache because my computer started to run slower.&lt;BR /&gt;The problem is that when I check it with PFMON, it seems to remain turned on...there is still L1 instruction cache misses and hits.&lt;BR /&gt;Anybody knows how this could be possible? I think that I've just turned off one part of the cache, and some other is still working, but I cant explain how?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;thank you for your answer!&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Ouali.&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2009 08:10:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Archive/Performance-Monitoring-Instruction-cache/m-p/864487#M7870</guid>
      <dc:creator>ouali</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-09-23T08:10:56Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

