Design, Automation and Test in Europe Conference and Exhibition Volume I (DATE'04) State-Preserving vs. Non-State-Preserving Leakage Control in Caches Paris, France February 16-February 20 ISBN: 0-7695-2085-5
This paper compares the effectiveness of state-preserving and non-state-preserving techniques for leakage control in caches by comparing drowsy cache and gated-Vss for data caches using 70nm technology parameters. To perform the comparison, we introduce "HotLeakage", a new architectural model for subthreshold and gate leakage that explicitly models the effects of temperature, voltage, and parameter variations, and has the ability to recalculate leakage currents dynamically as temperature and voltage change at runtime due to operating conditions, DVS techniques, etc. By comparing drowsy-cache and gated-Vss at different L2 latencies and different gate oxide thickness values, we are able to identify a range of operating parameters at which gated-Vss is more energy efficient than drowsy-cache, even though gated-Vss does not preserve data in cache lines that have been deactivated. We are also able to show potential further benefits of gated-Vss if an effective dynamic adaptation technique can be found. These results debunk a fairly widespread belief that state-preserving techniques are inherently superior to non-state-preserving techniques.
Citation:
Yingmin Li, Dharmesh Parikh, Yan Zhang, Karthik Sankaranarayanan, Mircea Stan, Kevin Skadron, "State-Preserving vs. Non-State-Preserving Leakage Control in Caches," date, vol. 1, pp.10022, Design, Automation and Test in Europe Conference and Exhibition Volume I (DATE'04), 2004 Usage of this product signifies your acceptance of the Terms of Use. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||