On 2018-01-04 15:43, DaveFroble wrote:
chrisv wrote:
Designed By India H1B Engineers wrote:

Crucially, these updates to both Linux and Windows will incur a
performance hit on Intel products. The effects are still being
benchmarked, however we're looking at a ballpark figure of five to 30
per cent slow down, depending on the task and the processor model.

This is ugly.Â* Think of the large computing centers, for example
Google's data centers.Â* Suddenly, they will need significantly more
CPU time, and thus electricity (and thus carbon), to get the job done?


And once all the spanners are tossed into the works, which will slow
things down, what happens when new CPUs without the issues are
available?Â* Will computers forever be artificially slowed down?

A whole bunch of someones has seriously dropped the ball on this.
Protected memory should be just that, protected, with no way to avoid
the protection.

I presume it's an implementation flaw, not a principle-of-design flaw.
So once addressed, it should result in both proper memory protection and
increased performance in future cores. Alas (per the article) this
can't be addressed with a microcode patch.

--
“When it is all said and done, there are approximately 94 million
full-time workers in private industry paying taxes to support 102
million non-workers and 21 million government workers.
In what world does this represent a strong job market?�
..Jim Quinn