3 ms·
oof. from the guys who brought you "the spectre patch in the kernel thats disabled by default" and "ignore your doubts, hyperthreading is still safe" comes "th
by nimbius 6y ago
oof.
from the guys who brought you "the spectre patch in the kernel thats disabled by default" and "ignore your doubts, hyperthreading is still safe" comes "the incredible patch built solely around shareholder confidence and breakroom communication"
EDIT: spectre, not meltdown. oops.
https://www.theregister.com/2018/11/20/linux_kernel_spectre_v2_patch_slowdown_intel/ https://www.theregister.com/2018/11/20/linux_kernel_spectre_...
- hansendc 6y ago> "the meltdown patch in the kernel thats disabled by default" I'm not sure to what you are referring to here. I was one of the people who worked on the Linux PTI implementation that mitigated Meltdown. My memory is not perfect, but I honestly don't know what you're referring to.
- Snild 6y agoI'm guessing they're referring to Linus' ranting on Intel here: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CA+55aFwOkH8RH12Dzs=hT3e7eS3Ckz9Ed6x_-9a0zs1cw9zbKA@mail.gmail.com/ https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CA+55aFwOkH8RH12Dzs=hT3e7eS3Ckz... > The whole IBRS_ALL feature to me very clearly says "Intel is not serious about this, we'll have a ugly hack that will be so expensive that we don't want to enable it by default, because that would look bad in benchmarks".
- mhh__ 6y ago> benchmarks Live by the SPEC, die by the SPEC