3 ms·
"Recently revealed" is more like a confirmation of what I had read many years before; and furthermore, that Intel's 64-bit x86 would've been more backwards-comp
by userbinator 1y ago
"Recently revealed" is more like a confirmation of what I had read many years before; and furthermore, that Intel's 64-bit x86 would've been more backwards-compatible and better-fitting than AMD64, which looks extremely inelegant in contrast, with several stupid missteps like https://www.pagetable.com/?p=1216 https://www.pagetable.com/?p=1216 (the comment near the bottom is very interesting.)
If you look at the 286's 16-bit protected mode and then the 386's 32-bit extensions, they fit neatly into the "gaps" in the former; there are some similar gaps in the latter, which look like they had a future extension in mind. Perhaps that consideration was already there in the 80s when the 386 was being designed, but as usual, management got in the way.
- Dylan16807 1y ago> (the comment near the bottom is very interesting.) Segmentation very useful for virtualization? I don't follow that claim.
- userbinator 1y agohttps://www.pagetable.com/?p=25 https://www.pagetable.com/?p=25
- Dylan16807 1y ago"The virtual machine monitor’s trap handler must reside in the guest’s address space, because an exception cannot switch address spaces." I would call this the real problem, and segmentation a bad workaround.
- CheeseFromLidl 1y agowould've been more backwards-compatible and better-fitting Eagerly awaiting the first submission of someone decapping, forcing the fuse, capping and running it.