<?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 &amp;gt;&amp;gt;...I am working on a in Software Tuning, Performance Optimization &amp; Platform Monitoring</title>
    <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Tuning-Performance/non-cached-memory-impact-on-platform-power-consumption/m-p/945082#M2040</link>
    <description>&amp;gt;&amp;gt;...I am working on a platform power optimization for WiFi over Haswell &amp;amp; Windows 8.1. I am trying to find out if for low
&amp;gt;&amp;gt;traffic scenarios, using non-cached memory for the receive buffers reduces platform power consumption...

In overall, when on a system less resources are used ( memory, processes, threads, etc ) power consumption goes down. Right? So, I would try to verify in a series of tests if smaller number of non-cached buffers ( that is, smaller total amount of allocated non-cached memory ), reduces power consumption.

&amp;gt;&amp;gt;...Currently, several data frames are DMA’ed to a cached memory followed by an interrupt. As a result, the core is awoken
&amp;gt;&amp;gt;staring from the beginning of the DMA. By using non-cached memory, the core can stay in low power state until the interrupt...

I think it is possible to allocate different number of buffers for different  power states and intensity of Wi-Fi traffic. When Wi-Fi traffic is low there is no need to allocate to many buffers. It means, some Wi-Fi traffic activity thresholding needs to be added in your software subsystem to allocate different number of buffers for every case.</description>
    <pubDate>Sun, 12 Jan 2014 01:26:09 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SergeyKostrov</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2014-01-12T01:26:09Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>non-cached memory impact on platform power consumption</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Tuning-Performance/non-cached-memory-impact-on-platform-power-consumption/m-p/945081#M2039</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;I am&amp;nbsp;working on a platform power optimization for WiFi over Haswell &amp;amp; Windows 8.1. I am&amp;nbsp;trying to find out if for low traffic scenarios, using non-cached memory for the receive buffers reduces platform power consumption. Currently, several data frames are DMA’ed to a cached memory followed by an interrupt. As a result, the core is awoken staring from the beginning of the DMA. By using non-cached memory, the core can stay in low power state until the interrupt. There are some questions that I&amp;nbsp;failed to find answers for:&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;OL&gt;
	&lt;LI&gt;When windows allocates non-cached shared memory for the driver, is it from an MTRR or PAT region?&lt;/LI&gt;
	&lt;LI&gt;What is the impact of allocating non-cached memory by the driver but still using snoop enabled DMA to this memory region (as per MTRR or PAT)? I would expect that for MTRR memory region, the core would not be awoken.&lt;/LI&gt;
	&lt;LI&gt;I could not find a way to get statistics such as the number of snooped/non-snooped transactions. Is there a tool that can provide such information for Haswell over Windows 8.1?&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;/OL&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Rony&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Dec 2013 16:02:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Tuning-Performance/non-cached-memory-impact-on-platform-power-consumption/m-p/945081#M2039</guid>
      <dc:creator>Rony_R_Intel</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-12-24T16:02:24Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>&gt;&gt;...I am working on a</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Tuning-Performance/non-cached-memory-impact-on-platform-power-consumption/m-p/945082#M2040</link>
      <description>&amp;gt;&amp;gt;...I am working on a platform power optimization for WiFi over Haswell &amp;amp; Windows 8.1. I am trying to find out if for low
&amp;gt;&amp;gt;traffic scenarios, using non-cached memory for the receive buffers reduces platform power consumption...

In overall, when on a system less resources are used ( memory, processes, threads, etc ) power consumption goes down. Right? So, I would try to verify in a series of tests if smaller number of non-cached buffers ( that is, smaller total amount of allocated non-cached memory ), reduces power consumption.

&amp;gt;&amp;gt;...Currently, several data frames are DMA’ed to a cached memory followed by an interrupt. As a result, the core is awoken
&amp;gt;&amp;gt;staring from the beginning of the DMA. By using non-cached memory, the core can stay in low power state until the interrupt...

I think it is possible to allocate different number of buffers for different  power states and intensity of Wi-Fi traffic. When Wi-Fi traffic is low there is no need to allocate to many buffers. It means, some Wi-Fi traffic activity thresholding needs to be added in your software subsystem to allocate different number of buffers for every case.</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 12 Jan 2014 01:26:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Tuning-Performance/non-cached-memory-impact-on-platform-power-consumption/m-p/945082#M2040</guid>
      <dc:creator>SergeyKostrov</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2014-01-12T01:26:09Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>I suppose that cached memory</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Tuning-Performance/non-cached-memory-impact-on-platform-power-consumption/m-p/945083#M2041</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I suppose that cached memory could be used more for management frame because of probably higher temporal locality.In the period of low traffic intensity.For example caching a struct members of beacon frame.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 12 Jan 2014 08:04:53 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Tuning-Performance/non-cached-memory-impact-on-platform-power-consumption/m-p/945083#M2041</guid>
      <dc:creator>Bernard</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2014-01-12T08:04:53Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

