3 ms·
Security, Performance, Shared Hardware Choose two.
by RcouF1uZ4gsC 5y ago
Security, Performance, Shared Hardware
Choose two.
- meepmorp 5y agoDepending on your first pick, two might be pushing it.
- topspin 5y agoPick up to two. Zero is valid; as in IoT.
- a1369209993 5y agoDepends on how you define performance; a decent chunk of IoT devices have good performance on a per-joule basis (rather than per-second), although that's nowhere near guarranteed. And the lack of hardware sharing is more for lack of demand than lack of ability. The S in IoT stands for security.
- quotemstr 5y agoI basically agree, but the word "shared" needs a bit more refinement; outright system partitioning --- this VM gets CPUs 1-2 and a chunk of DRAM, that VM gets CPU 3-4 and a disjoint chunk of DRAM --- seems safer than the kind of fine-grained oversubscribed resource sharing that's common today.
- jacksnipe 5y agoNot if those CPUs share one cache!
- jeffbee 5y agoOn Xeon at least you can statically allocate last-level cache space, and the L1 and L2 caches are dedicated to cores already.
- musicale 5y agoEven more so if you have separate buses, separate power supplies, electromagnetic/heat/sound isolation, etc..
- Taek 5y agoDoes running untrusted JavaScript count as shared hardware?