If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flawforces Linux, Windows redesign
Den 2018-01-06 kl. 00:01, skrev Pabst Blue Ribbon:
[Why quote 100s of lines?] I wonder if Intel will be sued because of that. https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/0...cpu_flaw_sued/ "Here come the lawyers! Intel slapped with three Meltdown bug lawsuits!" |
Ads |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign
On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 16:26:30 -0500, DaveFroble
wrote: Doomsdrzej wrote: On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 03:36:34 -0000 (UTC), Roger Blake wrote: On 2018-01-04, chrisv wrote: Might I say that was an awesome post, sir. His post was sheer idiocy. CO2 is not a pollutant - period. Human caused "climate change/global warming" is junk science at its worst. Even Reid Bryson, the scientist who was the father of modern climate science, stated that it is "a bunch of hooey." As I said, I absolutely refuse to reduce my own carbon emissions and in fact continue to see ways to increase them. (Do you dumbass hippies really believe that your stoopid windmills are solar panels are capable of keeping people warm and alive in the deep freeze that so much of the U.S. is currently experiencing?) I'm going to hate myself for doing this ... I _refuse_ to buy an electic car which has horrible range, little storage and looks absolutely awful in the hope that mining lithium to power them somehow causes less pollution than driving a regular, gas-burning car. Range, storage, and looks have nothing to do with electric vs gasoline. If some goofy designer feels he has to make an electric car look like a golf cart, that's his decision, not reality. As for pollution, it depends on how the electricity is produced. How is mining any worse than drilling for oil? The electic car HAS to look mostly bloated because the amount of lithium they need to put into the car to get it to have decent range is enormous. How Tesla managed to make a decent looking car despite all of that metal is beyond me but they definitely deserve credit. As for the oil statement, the point is not that oil drilling is better than mining for lithium, it's that both are polluting the environment. Therefore, there is no escaping the idea of polluting the environment by choosing an electric car over a gas one. Both end up doing something that the filthy hippies won't like. I want power in my vehicle as well as the ability to drive as far as I want to and that is something electric cars will never allow for. An electric vehicle can have plenty of power. Just as in a gasoline fueled car, it depends on how much energy one wishes to expend. As far as distance, you can only go as far as the next gas station. Empty tank, or dead battery, both leave you walking. An empty gas tank can quickly be filled at one of the many gas stations around any country. The process itself takes about 2 to 5 minutes depending on how much gas you need and you're ready to go the moment you've filled up. In the case of electric, even with fast charging, you need a good 30 minutes to get to 80%. You'll likely say that the driver can stop for a **** or whatever, but if the distance he needs to travel is significant, he'll be pretty annoyed about stopping for a long **** every two hours and that's only assuming that there will be a good number of electric charging stations around for him. |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign
On Sat, 6 Jan 2018 10:26:54 +1300, Your Name
wrote: On 2018-01-05 15:09:49 +0000, Doomsdrzej said: On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 11:32:52 +1300, Your Name wrote: On 2018-01-04 15:28:17 +0000, chrisv said: 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. Think of the large computing centers, for example Google's data centers. Suddenly, they will need significantly more CPU time, and thus electricity (and thus carbon), to get the job done? It aint just Intel either. The three different CPU issues affect chips from Intel, AMD, and ARM (no mention anywhere of PowerPC or Apple's own A-series), and affect virtually all devices sold in the last 15 years - computers, tablets, smartphones, etc.! That's gonna be one heck of a clean up bill! :-( The _only_ processors which will suffer a performance slowdown as a result of these problems are Intel ones. Spectre affects all chips and the fix does not affect performance. Meltdown affects processors built since 1995 by *Intel* and the fix will slow them down up to around 65%. There's actually THREE issues (at least), despite the fact that the media is over-hyping just those two. Very true. However, the ones affecting AMD had little to no chance of affecting performance from the very beginning whereas the Intel one was looking to be fairly disastrous. That Microsoft and Apple managed to keep the performance hit at a bare minimum is a testament to their ability. That last line is sure to trigger Peter the Klöwn. |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign
On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 23:01:39 GMT, Pabst Blue Ribbon
wrote: Alan Browne wrote: On 2018-01-05 09:15, DaveFroble wrote: Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote: Becuse the designers, for performance reasons, has mapped kernel memory into the user process address space and relies on the OS to check protection before any kernel memory (or code) is accessed. The issue with the current issues is that the hardware (the CPU) does these accesses in hardware "under the hood" without control by the OS. If you map your kernel memory in another way that uses the hardware protection facilities, you are (as I understand) safe, at the cost of worse performance to switch between user and kernel mode. As I wrote, someone dropped the ball on this one. Speculative execution is part of the HW, not software.* It appears the HW doesn't follow it's own rules.* Or, perhaps I don't actually understand the problem? At least as well as I do. These are very complex mechanisms and complexity is usually where you're most likely to get problems. In this case the h/w implementation didn't reflect the design goal. This means intel had very poor design review and abysmal testing of security features. I doubt it. Yes, it's assumption but I think Intel was aware and gave OK to flawed design because of performance/cost. The most popular theory is that Intel not only left it in there but actually put the flaw in there to facilitate spying by the NSA. There was even anonymous testimony by an Intel employee that explained it as being used for that purpose and that the company was aware of the issue for years. |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign
On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 23:01:40 GMT, Pabst Blue Ribbon
wrote: Peter Köhlmann wrote: Doomsdrzej wrote: On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 11:32:52 +1300, Your Name wrote: On 2018-01-04 15:28:17 +0000, chrisv said: 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. Think of the large computing centers, for example Google's data centers. Suddenly, they will need significantly more CPU time, and thus electricity (and thus carbon), to get the job done? It aint just Intel either. The three different CPU issues affect chips from Intel, AMD, and ARM (no mention anywhere of PowerPC or Apple's own A-series), and affect virtually all devices sold in the last 15 years - computers, tablets, smartphones, etc.! That's gonna be one heck of a clean up bill! :-( The _only_ processors which will suffer a performance slowdown as a result of these problems are Intel ones. Spectre affects all chips and the fix does not affect performance. Meltdown affects processors built since 1995 by *Intel* and the fix will slow them down up to around 65%. Bull****. I tested my system with Geekbench4 before and after the patch. The single-test was slowed by around 1%, the multi-test by somewhat less than 2%. This does not involve lots of I/O, but it indicates that processor speed is very little affected. The measured values are barely higher than differences due to background tasks in the single test. Both values are not at all "being able to be felt" by the user. I disagree. Calculate 2% of your income. Is it "very little" money? If you have to give 2% of your income to, let's say, me - will you be able to feel it? Don't confuse Peter the Klöwn with basic math! |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processordesign flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign
Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote:
Den 2018-01-06 kl. 00:01, skrev Pabst Blue Ribbon: [Why quote 100s of lines?] My newsreader is not that great with editing. I wonder if Intel will be sued because of that. https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/0...cpu_flaw_sued/ "Here come the lawyers! Intel slapped with three Meltdown bug lawsuits!" Thank you. Just like I expected. |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign
On 2018-01-05 23:55:26 +0000, Doomsdrzej said:
On Sat, 6 Jan 2018 10:26:54 +1300, Your Name wrote: On 2018-01-05 15:09:49 +0000, Doomsdrzej said: On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 11:32:52 +1300, Your Name wrote: On 2018-01-04 15:28:17 +0000, chrisv said: 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. Think of the large computing centers, for example Google's data centers. Suddenly, they will need significantly more CPU time, and thus electricity (and thus carbon), to get the job done? It aint just Intel either. The three different CPU issues affect chips from Intel, AMD, and ARM (no mention anywhere of PowerPC or Apple's own A-series), and affect virtually all devices sold in the last 15 years - computers, tablets, smartphones, etc.! That's gonna be one heck of a clean up bill! :-( The _only_ processors which will suffer a performance slowdown as a result of these problems are Intel ones. Spectre affects all chips and the fix does not affect performance. Meltdown affects processors built since 1995 by *Intel* and the fix will slow them down up to around 65%. There's actually THREE issues (at least), despite the fact that the media is over-hyping just those two. Very true. However, the ones affecting AMD had little to no chance of affecting performance from the very beginning whereas the Intel one was looking to be fairly disastrous. That Microsoft and Apple managed to keep the performance hit at a bare minimum is a testament to their ability. That last line is sure to trigger Peter the Klöwn. Microsoft simply waited for Apple to fix the issue, then copied them. ;-) |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flawforces Linux, Windows redesign
Pabst Blue Ribbon wrote:
Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote: Den 2018-01-06 kl. 00:01, skrev Pabst Blue Ribbon: [Why quote 100s of lines?] My newsreader is not that great with editing. I wonder if Intel will be sued because of that. https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/0...cpu_flaw_sued/ "Here come the lawyers! Intel slapped with three Meltdown bug lawsuits!" Thank you. Just like I expected. Well, the lawyers will try anything. Doesn't mean they have a case. Lots of examples. Make liquor, somebody gets hurt .... Make guns, somebody gets shot .... Make cars, somebody gets hurt .... Quite frankly, I doubt the CPU makers ever imagined such an exploit. Unless some lawyers can come up with a "smoking gun", I'd think Intel et;al would have a great defense. They also could claim that it's the software people who mixed user and kernel memory who created the problem. Nobody knows everything. -- David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: DFE Ultralights, Inc. 170 Grimplin Road Vanderbilt, PA 15486 |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flawforces Linux, Windows redesign
On 1/5/2018 8:06 PM, DaveFroble wrote:
Pabst Blue Ribbon wrote: Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote: Den 2018-01-06 kl. 00:01, skrev Pabst Blue Ribbon: [Why quote 100s of lines?] My newsreader is not that great with editing. I wonder if Intel will be sued because of that. https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/0...cpu_flaw_sued/ "Here come the lawyers! Intel slapped with three Meltdown bug lawsuits!" Thank you. Just like I expected. Well, the lawyers will try anything. Doesn't mean they have a case. Lots of examples. Make liquor, somebody gets hurt .... Make guns, somebody gets shot .... Make cars, somebody gets hurt .... Quite frankly, I doubt the CPU makers ever imagined such an exploit. Unless some lawyers can come up with a "smoking gun", I'd think Intel et;al would have a great defense. They also could claim that it's the software people who mixed user and kernel memory who created the problem. Nobody knows everything. And almost nobody here can effect a solution inside the CPU. It's all just bitching about it. I'd be very disappointed if Intel were successfully sued over someone discovering a way to infiltrate their microcode. Might as well sue Kwikset because someone figgered out how to pick the 40 year old lock on your front door and steal your stuff. **** happens, get over it and move on. |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flawforces Linux, Windows redesign
Doomsdrzej wrote:
On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 12:33:59 +0100, Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote: Den 2018-01-05 kl. 04:36, skrev Roger Blake: On 2018-01-04, chrisv wrote: Might I say that was an awesome post, sir. His post was sheer idiocy. CO2 is not a pollutant - period. No, it is a natural part of the atmosphare, but it is a balance. It has to be in the right proportions. To much (and in particual if we continue to burn fosile fuels that ads carbone that was bound millions of years ago) and the climate will be hurt. You can't _hurt_ climate. The Earth always balances itself out and there are thousands of years of data showing this. Some periods are cold; some periods are warm. In the end, there is a balance regardless of what its living creatures do. Human caused "climate change/global warming" is junk science at its worst. Even Reid Bryson, the scientist who was the father of modern climate science, stated that it is "a bunch of hooey." I could probably name the scientist that has the opposite view, but the space in one posting would not be enough. And why pick one that has been dead for 10 years? The views on global warming has changed over the years and a lot has happend the last decade. Please demonstrate how. As I said, I absolutely refuse to reduce my own carbon emissions and in fact continue to see ways to increase them. OK. fine. You'll be sorry and your children will be hurt. But then, if you could reduce your C02 emission, what would be the issue? Reducing CO2 emissions should be voluntary in the same way that companies having a $15 minimum wage should be voluntary. In the United States, some companies did so and as a result show that they can afford to pay people that well without there being any kind of consequences. In Ontario, for instance, the $15 minimum wage was forced and companies now have to cut back somehow to afford to pay people that well. The liberal approach to CO2 emissions involves forcing companies and the people to make significant sacrifices and the end result is that it will do damage to the economy and the standard of life in the _hope_ that we will somehow be able to slow the evitable in a very insignificant way at a time when none of us will still be alive. The best governments _should_ hope for is to raise awareness about the potential problem and encourage people to make whatever changes they can which is not at all what they've been doing with schemes like the Paris Climate Accord. (Do you dumbass hippies really believe that your stoopid windmills are solar panels are capable of keeping people warm and alive in the deep freeze that so much of the U.S. is currently experiencing?) That weather phenomenon is probably also caused by the disturbed climate caused by the CO2 emissions. So in the case of the current US weather issues, you could say that it is, in a way, self-inflicted. Anyway, you could probably start with more efficient cars, shutting down all AC equipment and so on. This cold is just a temporarily storm and has little to do with the overall climate issues. One can not use the amount of snow on the back garden to judge about the climate at large. Just watch this: https://hooktube.com/watch?v=NjlC02NsIt0 Wonderful video. He made us believe the sea level isn't rising.The only problem is that the sea level is rising, that is measurable. However, it is true that the earth has known warmer and colder periods, even in the past 2000 years. The problem is we can determine this from descriptions about what was going on, but people didn't have thermometers to record the temperatures. |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign
Doomsdrzej wrote:
On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 17:13:12 +0100, Peter Köhlmann wrote: Doomsdrzej wrote: On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 11:32:52 +1300, Your Name wrote: On 2018-01-04 15:28:17 +0000, chrisv said: 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. Think of the large computing centers, for example Google's data centers. Suddenly, they will need significantly more CPU time, and thus electricity (and thus carbon), to get the job done? It aint just Intel either. The three different CPU issues affect chips from Intel, AMD, and ARM (no mention anywhere of PowerPC or Apple's own A-series), and affect virtually all devices sold in the last 15 years - computers, tablets, smartphones, etc.! That's gonna be one heck of a clean up bill! :-( The _only_ processors which will suffer a performance slowdown as a result of these problems are Intel ones. Spectre affects all chips and the fix does not affect performance. Meltdown affects processors built since 1995 by *Intel* and the fix will slow them down up to around 65%. Bull****. I tested my system with Geekbench4 before and after the patch. The single-test was slowed by around 1%, the multi-test by somewhat less than 2%. This does not involve lots of I/O, but it indicates that processor speed is very little affected. The measured values are barely higher than differences due to background tasks in the single test. Both values are not at all "being able to be felt" by the user. Notice that my machine constantly runs 3 diffferent databases too Either post a video of you doing the test of post some data proving what you claim. Idiot You are even way too stupid to do such a simple benchmark yourself, otherwise you would not make such ridiculous demands. But thats SlimeSnit for us, the dumbest clown known to mankind |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flawforces Linux, Windows redesign
On 2018-01-05 16:00, DaveFroble wrote:
Alan Browne wrote: On 2018-01-05 09:15, DaveFroble wrote: Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote: Becuse the designers, for performance reasons, has mapped kernel memory into the user process address space and relies on the OS to check protection before any kernel memory (or code) is accessed. The issue with the current issues is that the hardware (the CPU) does these accesses in hardware "under the hood" without control by the OS. If you map your kernel memory in another way that uses the hardware protection facilities, you are (as I understand) safe, at the cost of worse performance to switch between user and kernel mode. As I wrote, someone dropped the ball on this one. Speculative execution is part of the HW, not software.Â* It appears the HW doesn't follow it's own rules.Â* Or, perhaps I don't actually understand the problem? At least as well as I do.Â* These are very complex mechanisms and complexity is usually where you're most likely to get problems. In this case the h/w implementation didn't reflect the design goal. This means intel had very poor design review and abysmal testing of security features. There seems a whole bunch of us "speculating" about things we probably don't know enough about. I am very certain that they either did not design the testing correctly or didn't test per the test plan correctly. Or a bad scenario: they saw it and carpeted it. :-) It seems to me that before memory is fetched into cache, the CPU should be determining whether it should indeed be fetching that memory.Â* Yeah, The CPU memory controller is (usually) the arbiter of whether a fetch is "legal" in the privilege scheme - so if something is allowed to be fetched, then it is fetched. So (hierarchically) the fetch goes to the decoding pipeline(s) -and- is simultaneously copied to the cache. At that point the MC has "allowed" the fetch. Writes to memory are also written to cache. The issue seems to be that post fetch from Kernel assigned memory, the cache makes some privileged data available to lower priority tasks after the context switch. That is the gist. sounds simple, but I'm betting it isn't. I recall when pipelining came to simple microprocessors and we were in the lab swapping processors and measuring the performance gains and salivating over not much... or IIRC a competitor to the 8088 came out with some cycles saved on some instructions and we were doing the same thing. Then pre-fetching came - then predictive decoding and so on ... What they do these days in processors in mind-boggling layers of complexity before you even get close to privilege management. To me though, multicore processing is the best achievement. Certainly makes OS's and apps very smooth in operation. -- “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 |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flawforces Linux, Windows redesign
On 2018-01-05 18:01, Pabst Blue Ribbon wrote:
Alan Browne wrote: In this case the h/w implementation didn't reflect the design goal. This means intel had very poor design review and abysmal testing of security features. I doubt it. Yes, it's assumption but I think Intel was aware and gave OK to flawed design because of performance/cost. Possible, but I'd discount a deliberate pass. FDIV was very costly to intel - this could be much more costly if the class action suits start flying due to increased computing costs and so on. -- “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 |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processordesign flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign
DaveFroble wrote:
Pabst Blue Ribbon wrote: Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote: Den 2018-01-06 kl. 00:01, skrev Pabst Blue Ribbon: [Why quote 100s of lines?] My newsreader is not that great with editing. I wonder if Intel will be sued because of that. https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/0...cpu_flaw_sued/ "Here come the lawyers! Intel slapped with three Meltdown bug lawsuits!" Thank you. Just like I expected. Well, the lawyers will try anything. Doesn't mean they have a case. Lots of examples. Make liquor, somebody gets hurt .... Make guns, somebody gets shot .... Make cars, somebody gets hurt .... Make cars, cars do not perform as advertised or not as safe as expected, have to do a recall. |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processordesign flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign
Alan Browne wrote:
On 2018-01-05 18:01, Pabst Blue Ribbon wrote: Alan Browne wrote: In this case the h/w implementation didn't reflect the design goal. This means intel had very poor design review and abysmal testing of security features. I doubt it. Yes, it's assumption but I think Intel was aware and gave OK to flawed design because of performance/cost. Possible, but I'd discount a deliberate pass. FDIV was very costly to intel - this could be much more costly if the class action suits start flying due to increased computing costs and so on. "Could be much more costly" didn't stop Volkswagen. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|