Embodiments of the invention relate generally to the field of information processing and more specifically, to the field of distributing program tasks among various processing elements.
As more processing throughput is required from modern microprocessors, it is often at the expense of power consumption. Some applications, such as mobile internet devices (MIDs), ultra-mobile personal computers (UMPCs), cellular phones, personal digital assistants (PDAs), and even laptop/notebook computers, may benefit from processors that consume relatively little power. However, achieving relatively high processing throughput at relatively low power is a challenge, involving various design trade-offs, depending on the usage models of the computing platform.
One approach to reducing power in a computing platform when there is relatively little activity, is to place the processor in a low-power state. However, placing a processor in a low-power state or returning a processor from a low-power state may require a non-trivial amount of time. Therefore, it may or may not be worth the time required to place a processor in a low-power state or to return the processor from a low-power state. Furthermore, not all processes and tasks that are run on a processor require the full processing throughput of the processor.
Embodiments of the invention are illustrated by way of example, and not by way of limitation, in the figures of the accompanying drawings and in which like reference numerals refer to similar elements and in which:
Embodiments of the invention include a microprocessor or processing system having a number of asymmetric processing elements. In some embodiments, each processing element is a processor core, having one or more execution resources, such as arithmetic logic units (ALUs), instruction decoder, and instruction retirement unit, among other things. In some embodiments, the number of asymmetric processing elements has at least two different processing throughput or performance capabilities, power consumption characteristics or limits, voltage supply requirements, clock frequency characteristics, number of transistors, and/or instruction set architectures (ISAs). In one embodiment, an asymmetric microprocessor includes at least one main processor core having larger power consumption characteristics and/or processing throughput/performance characteristics than at least one other processing core within or otherwise associated with the microprocessor.
In one embodiment, a process or task running or intended to run on a main higher power/performance processing core may be transferred to one of the other lower power/performance processing cores for various reasons, including that the process or task does not require the processing throughput of one of the main cores, the processor or the system in which it's used is placed into or otherwise requires a lower-power consumption condition (such as when running on battery power), and for increasing the processing throughput of the asymmetric microprocessor or system in which the higher power/performance cores and lower power/performance cores are used. For example, in one embodiment, the asymmetric processing elements may be used concurrently or otherwise in parallel to perform multiple tasks or processes, thereby improving the overall throughput of the processor and processing system.
In one embodiment, the at least one main processing core has a different ISA than at least one of the at least one processor cores having a lower power consumption characteristic and/or processing performance capability. In one embodiment, instruction translation logic in the form of hardware, software, or some combination thereof, may be used to translate instructions for the at least one main processor core into instructions for the at least one other lower-power/performance processing core. For example, in one embodiment, one or more of the main higher power/performance cores may have a complex instruction set computing (CISC) architecture, such as the “x86” computing architecture, and therefore performs instructions that are intended for x86 processor cores. One or more of the lower power/performance cores may have a different ISA than the main core, including a reduced instruction set computing (RISC) architecture, such as an Advanced RISC Machine (ARM) core. In other embodiments, the main processing element(s) and the lower power/performance processing element(s) may include other architectures, such as the MIPS ISA. In other embodiments the main processing element(s) may have the same ISA as the lower power/performance element(s) (e.g., x86).
In one embodiment, a number of different threads, processes, or tasks associated with one or more software programs may be intelligently moved among and run on a number of different processing elements, having a number of different processing capabilities (e.g., operating voltage, performance, power consumption, clock frequency, pipeline depth, transistor leakage, ISA), according to the dynamic performance and power consumption needs of the processor or computer system. For example, if one process, such as that associated with a spreadsheet application, does not require the full processing capabilities of a main, higher performance processor core, but may instead be run with acceptable performance on a lower-power core, the process may be transferred to or otherwise run on the lower power core and the main, higher power processor core may be placed in a low power state or may just remain idle. By running threads/processes/tasks on a processor core that better matches the performance needs of the thread/process/task, power consumption may be optimized, according to some embodiments.
In other embodiments, the low-power cores may be of a different ISA than the main cores. For example, the low-power cores may have an ARM ISA and the main cores may have an x86 ISA, such that a program using x86 instructions may need to have these instructions translated into ARM instructions if a process/task/thread is transferred to one of the ARM cores. Because the process/thread/task being transferred may be one that does not require the performance of one of the main cores, a certain amount of latency associated with the instruction translation may be tolerated without noticeable or significant loss of performance.
Also illustrated in
In one embodiment, logic 129 may be used to monitor performance or power of any of the cores illustrated in
In some embodiments, the logic 129 may be hardware logic or software, which may or may not determine a core(s) on which a process/task/thread should be run independently of the OS. In one embodiment, for example, logic 129 is implemented in software to monitor the activity level of the cores, such as the main cores, to see if it drops below a threshold level, and in response thereto, causes one or more processes running on the monitored core(s) to be transferred to a lower-power core, such as cores 115 and 120. Conversely, logic 129 may monitor the activity level of a process running on a lower-power core 115 and 120 in order to determine whether it is rising above a threshold level, thereby indicating the process should be transferred to one of the main cores 105, 110. In other embodiments, logic 129 may independently monitor other performance or power indicators within the processor or system and cause processes/threads/tasks to be migrated to cores that more closely fit the performance needs of the tasks/processes/threads while meeting the power requirements of the processor of the system at a given time. In this way, the power and performance of processor 100 can be controlled without the programmer or OS being concerned or even aware of the underlying power state of the processor.
In other embodiments, each core in
In one embodiment, logic 129 may be hardware, software, or some combination thereof. Furthermore, logic 129 may be distributed within one or more cores or exist outside the cores while maintaining electronic connection to the one or more cores to monitor activity/power and cause threads/tasks/processes to be transferred to appropriate cores.
In addition to the FSB computer system illustrated in
At operation 505, an event (e.g., yield, exception, etc.) occurs in the main core to cause state from the core to be saved and copied to a lower power/performance core. In one embodiment, a handler program is invoked in response to the event to cause the main core state to be transferred from the main core to a lower power/performance core. At operation 510, the transferred thread/process/task is restarted or resumed on the lower power/performance core. At operation 515, the main core may be placed in a lower power state (e.g., paused, halted, etc.) until 520 either the transferred process/task/thread requires above a threshold level of performance, in which case the thread/process/task may be transferred back to the main core 525 in a similar manner as it was transferred to the lower power/performance core, or another task/process/thread is scheduled for execution on the main core.
In one embodiment, the thread/process/task transferred from the main core to the lower power/performance core is first translated from the ISA of the main core to the ISA of the lower power/performance core, if the two have different architectures. For example, in one embodiment, the main core is an x86 architecture core and the lower power/performance core is an ARM architecture core, in which case instructions of the transferred thread/process/task may be translated (for example, by a software binary translation shell) from x86 instructions to ARM instructions. Because the thread/process/task being transferred is by definition one that does not require as much performance as to require it to be ran on the main core, a certain amount of latency may be tolerated in translating the process/task/thread from the x86 architecture to ARM architecture.
In one embodiment, each processing unit provides a monitor value that typically reflects activity level, power consumption and/or temperature information to the monitor 610 via signals such as processor communication (PC) lines PC-1 through PC-N. The monitor value may take a variety of forms and may be a variety of different types of information. For example, the monitor value may simply be an analog or digital reading of the temperature of each processing unit. Alternatively, the monitor value may be a simple or complex activity factor that reflects the operational activity level of a particular processing unit. In some embodiments, power consumption information reflected by the monitor value may include a measured current level or other indication of how much power is being consumed by the processing unit. Additionally, some embodiments may convey power consumption information to the monitor 110 that is a composite of several of these or other types of known or otherwise available means of measuring or estimating power consumption. Accordingly, some power consumption metric which reflects one or more of these or other power consumption indicators may be derived. The transmitted monitor value may reflect a temperature or a power consumption metric, which itself may factor in a temperature. Serial, parallel, and/or various known or otherwise available protocols may be used to transmit this information to the power monitor.
In one embodiment, the monitor 610 receives the power consumption information from the various processing units and analyzes whether the power consumption or activity level of one processing unit is at a level to justify the overhead of re-allocating processes to different processing units. For example, the monitor may be triggered to rearrange processes when a particular processing unit falls below a threshold level of activity, or when power consumption is above an acceptable level. In one embodiment, the monitor 610 may develop a total power consumption metric to indicate the total power consumption, total activity level metric, or total thermal state of all processing units to effectuate the various power control strategies. In one embodiment, the monitor 610 may be a hardware component, a software component, routine, or module, or a combination of hardware and software that works either dependently or independently of the operating system.
one embodiment, the monitor communicates to the processing units via thread or process swap control (SC) lines SC-1 through SC-N. The monitor is capable of moving and exchanging processes by sending commands via the SC lines. Thus, processes can be swapped between processing units, rotated between processing units, etc., in response to the particular chosen activity level, thermal, or power consumption metric being reached. Alternatively, or in addition to power consumption metric triggered process management, process rotation between processing units may be periodically performed to reduce the power consumption of the processor.
Power management controller 715 may place core 701 into a power state corresponding to an operating mode of the core 701 by controlling clock frequencies and power supplies to core 701. For example, the power management controller may turn the clocks of core 701 back to their previous frequencies and voltages back to their original level and return the state and context information from memory 710 so that the core 701 may function as it previously did before entering the low power state. In one embodiment, the return of core 701 to a previous power state may be in response to an interrupt from interrupt controller 720. In one embodiment, the power management controller causes the core 701 to entire a previous power state in response to a signal from the interrupt controller 720 and places the low-power core 705 into a low power state using the same process as for the higher-performance core 701. In one embodiment, if an interrupt occurs corresponding to a process or thread requiring less performance, and core 701 is in an idle state (e.g. in an idle loop), the core 701 may once again enter a low power state and the core 705 may enter an operating power state to handle processing the lower-performance process or thread. If an interrupt occurs corresponding to a process or thread requiring less performance and both cores 701 and 705 are in low power state, then only core 705 enters an operating state to handle the required processing while core 701 remains in low power state. In this manner, the logic 700 uses cores that more closely correspond to the processing needs of a thread or process, thereby saving system power.
Many different types of processing devices could benefit from the use of such process re-allocation techniques. For example, the processing units 600-1 through 600-N may be general purpose processors (e.g., microprocessors) or may be microprocessor cores for a multiple core (on a single die) microprocessor. Alternatively, digital signal processors, graphics processors, network processors, or any type of special purpose processor that may be used in a system with multiple parallel units or cores may benefit from thermally (or power) motivated process shifting between processing units. The processing units or processors may be identical or have at least partial functional overlap. That is, each processing unit has some common set of instructions or commands such that there are at least some (if not all) processes that can be executed on more than one processing unit or processor. In other embodiments, the processing units may be asymmetrical, in as much as they have any or a combination of different performance capabilities, number of transistors, power consumption or thermal characteristics, clock frequencies, or ISA.
One or more aspects of at least one embodiment may be implemented by representative data stored on a machine-readable medium which represents various logic within the processor, which when read by a machine causes the machine to fabricate logic to perform the techniques described herein. Such representations, known as “IP cores” may be stored on a tangible, machine readable medium (“tape”) and supplied to various customers or manufacturing facilities to load into the fabrication machines that actually make the logic or processor.
Thus, a method and apparatus for directing micro-architectural memory region accesses has been described. It is to be understood that the above description is intended to be illustrative and not restrictive. Many other embodiments will be apparent to those of skill in the art upon reading and understanding the above description. The scope of the invention should, therefore, be determined with reference to the appended claims, along with the full scope of equivalents to which such claims are entitled.
This application is a Divisional, which claims benefit under 35 USC §120 of application Ser. No. 12/220,092, filed Jul. 22, 2008, currently pending; which claims benefit under 35 USC §119(e) of Provisional Application Ser. No. 61/067,737, filed Feb. 29, 2008.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4763242 | Lee et al. | Aug 1988 | A |
5293500 | Ishida et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5560013 | Scalzi | Sep 1996 | A |
5890799 | Yiu et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5909567 | Novak et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5991883 | Atkinson | Nov 1999 | A |
6006320 | Parady | Dec 1999 | A |
6021484 | Park | Feb 2000 | A |
6035408 | Huang | Mar 2000 | A |
6058434 | Wilt et al. | May 2000 | A |
6219742 | Stanley | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6240521 | Barber et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6405320 | Lee et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6501999 | Cai | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6513057 | McCrory et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6513124 | Furuichi et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6567839 | Borkenhagen et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6631474 | Cai et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6718475 | Cai | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6732280 | Cheok et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6901522 | Buch | May 2005 | B2 |
6968469 | Fleischmann et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
7017060 | Therien et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7028167 | Soltis et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7069463 | Oh | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7089344 | Rader et al. | Aug 2006 | B1 |
7093147 | Farkas et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7171546 | Adams | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7231531 | Cupps et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7269752 | John | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7334142 | Hack | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7389403 | Alpert et al. | Jun 2008 | B1 |
7461275 | Belmont et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7492368 | Nordquist et al. | Feb 2009 | B1 |
7500126 | Terechko et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7500127 | Fleck et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7624215 | Axford et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7743232 | Shen et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
RE41752 | Oh | Sep 2010 | E |
8028290 | Rymarczyk et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8060727 | Blixt | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8214808 | Day et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8327354 | Magenheimer | Dec 2012 | B1 |
8615647 | Hum et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8806228 | Gee et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
20020095609 | Tokunaga | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020129288 | Loh et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20030065734 | Ramakesavan | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030088800 | Cai | May 2003 | A1 |
20030100340 | Cupps et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030110012 | Orenstein et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030224768 | Adjamah | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040123087 | Morris | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040133884 | Zemach | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040243983 | Kumura | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050066209 | Kee et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050132239 | Athas et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050182980 | Sutardja | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20060026371 | Chrysos et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060036878 | Rothman et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060095807 | Grochowski et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060200651 | Collopy et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060236127 | Kurien et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060294401 | Munger | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070038875 | Cupps et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070043531 | Kosche et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070067164 | Goudar | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070079150 | Belmont et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070083785 | Sutardja | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070094444 | Sutardja | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070157211 | Wang et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070220246 | Powell et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070234077 | Rothman et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070283138 | Miga et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080016374 | Gee et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080028244 | Capps et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080028245 | Ober et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080077928 | Matsuzaki et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080141011 | Zhang | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080172657 | Bensal | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080216073 | Yates | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080244538 | Nair | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080263324 | Sutardja | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080307244 | Bertelsen et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090089758 | Chen | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090109230 | Miller et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090150893 | Johnson et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090165014 | Park | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090172654 | Zhao | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090193243 | Ely | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090216073 | Zipper | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090222654 | Hum et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20100185833 | Saito et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100268916 | Hu et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2382180 | May 2003 | GB |
WO03100546 | Oct 2003 | WO |
2004064119 | Jul 2004 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Irani et al., “Online Strategies for Dynamic Power Management in Systems with Multiple Power-Saving States,” ACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems, vol. 2, No. 3, Aug. 2003, pp. 325-346. |
Lefurgy et al., “Energy Management for Commercial Servers,” Computer, IEEE, Dec. 2003, vol. 36, Issue 12, pp. 39-48. |
Kumar et al., “Single-ISA Heterogeneous Multi-Core Architectures: The Potential for Processor Power Reduction,” Proceedings of the 36th Annual IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Microarchitecture, 2003, pp. 81-92. |
Benini et al., “A Survey of Design Techniques for System-Level Dynamic Power Management,” IEEE Transactions on Very Large Scale Integration (VLSI) Systems, Jun. 2000, vol. 8, Issue 3, pp. 299-316. |
Abramson et al., “Intel Virtualization Technology for Directed I/O,” Intel Technology Journal, Aug. 10, 2006, vol. 10, Issue 3, pp. 179-192 (16 pages included). |
International Search Report of PCT/2007/000010, Swedish Patent Office, Stockholm, Sweden, dated May 16, 2007, 4 pages. |
Seng et al. “Reducing Power with Dynamic Critical Path Information”, Proc. of the 34th annual ACM/IEEE international symposium on Microarchitecture, ACM, Dec. 2001, pp. 114-123. |
Advisory Action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/220,092 mailed Jul. 31, 2012, 4 pages. |
Advisory Action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/220,092 mailed Oct. 11, 2011, 3 pages. |
Advisory Action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/380,210 mailed Apr. 6, 2012, 4 pages. |
Advisory Action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/380,210 mailed Feb. 25, 2014, 6 pages. |
Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/220,092 mailed Jul. 26, 2011, 8 pages. |
Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/220,092 mailed May 15, 2013, 12 pages. |
Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/220,092 mailed May 21, 2012, 20 pages. |
Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/380,210 mailed Dec. 9, 2013, 16 pages. |
Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/380,210 mailed Feb. 10, 2012, 13 pages. |
Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/954,977 mailed Jun. 21, 2016, 7 pages. |
Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/954,979 mailed Jun. 13, 2016, 7 pages. |
Final OFfice Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/954,980 mailed Jun. 13, 2016, 7 pages. |
Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 14/154,517 mailed Feb. 3, 2016, 28 pages. |
Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 14/498,014 mailed Feb. 3, 2016, 15 pages. |
Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 14/498,014 mailed Oct. 25, 2016, 13 pages. |
Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 14/498,135, mailed Jan. 19, 2017, 23 pages. |
Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 14/498,135 mailed Mar. 2, 2016, 6 pages. |
Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 14/498,319 mailed Mar. 29, 2016, 6 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/220,092 mailed Dec. 5, 2012, 15 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/220,092 mailed Dec. 29, 2011, 13 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/220,092 mailed Feb. 9, 2011, 7 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/380,210 mailed Jun. 26, 2013, 18 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/380,210 mailed Mar. 20, 2014, 25 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/380,210 mailed Sep. 26, 2011, 14 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/954,977 mailed Aug. 27, 2015, 16 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/954,977 mailed Jan. 22, 2016, 9 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/954,977 mailed Nov. 23, 2016, 21 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/954,979 mailed Aug. 31, 2015, 16 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/954,979 mailed Jan. 14, 2016, 9 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/954,980 mailed Aug. 31, 2015, 16 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/954,980 mailed Jan. 14, 2016, 8 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/954,980, mailed Jan. 18, 2017, 18 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 14/154,517 mailed Sep. 16, 2015, 18 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 14/154,517 mailed Jun. 21, 2016, 7 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 14/498,014 mailed Jun. 13, 2016, 8 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 14/498,014 mailed Oct. 6, 2015, 6 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 14/498,135 mailed Aug. 18, 2016, 7 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 14/498,135 mailed Oct. 15, 2015, 6 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 14/498,319 mailed Oct. 14, 2015, 6 pages. |
Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 12/220,092 mailed Aug. 7, 2013, 7 pages. |
Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 12/380,210 mailed Oct. 22, 2014, 4 pages. |
Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 12/380,210 mailed Sep. 15, 2014, 5 pages. |
Requirement for Restriction/Election from U.S. Appl. No. 12/220,092 mailed Apr. 25, 2012, 4 pages. |
Shimpi, Anand Lal, Intel Yonah Performance Preview—Part 1: “The Exclusive First look at Yonah,” Nov. 30, 2005, Webpage available at: http://www.anandtech.com/show/1880. |
Non Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 14/498,014, mailed Apr. 3, 2017, 28 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/954,979, mailed Apr. 3, 2017, 20 pages. |
Non-Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 14/498,319, mailed Dec. 6, 2016, 23 pages. |
Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 13/954,977, mailed Apr. 11, 2017, 13 pages. |
Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 14/154,517, mailed Feb. 9, 2017, 21 pages. |
Final Office Action from U.S. Appl. No. 13/954,980, dated Jun. 23, 2017, 20 pages. |
Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 14/498,135, dated May 10, 2017, 12 pages. |
Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 14/498,319, dated May 1, 2017, 17 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20140019656 A1 | Jan 2014 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61067737 | Feb 2008 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 12220092 | Jul 2008 | US |
Child | 14033008 | US |