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 |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flawforces Linux, Windows redesign
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. 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. -- “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 |
Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flawforces Linux, Windows redesign
On 2018-01-05 09:06, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
On 01/05/2018 08:50 AM, Alan Browne wrote: 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.Â* Alas (per the article) this can't be addressed with a microcode patch. Sounds more like a "principle-of-design" flaw to me.Â* Hard to believe all those different companies all made the same mistake building on a sound design. Call as you like I'll stick to my version. "All"? What? 2? They have similar design goals so having similar attacks on the problem aren't a surprise. Indeed in their communities ideas fly around somewhat freely before implementation puts them under proprietary "protection". The failure (I'm speculating) is in design implementation and failure to test the intent of the security in an OS environment. Further speculation: the CPU h/w designers are a couple steps away from OS designers and their understanding of OS concerns doesn't see clearly to how to design the security tests. -- “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 |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign
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%. Apple has already partially fixed the problems in the MacOS X High Sierra update 10.13.2 (with no noticeable performance slow-down) and further fixes due in the up-coming 10.13.3 update currently in beta testing. Users of old versions of OS X may well be stuck though and not get any update. Mac OS is already a slow piece of poop that caters to the dumbest elements of society so I doubt that any of the retards using it would notice a slowdown of their slow as molasses operating system no matter how significant it was. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign
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 _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. 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. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign
On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 10:04:06 +0100, Peter Köhlmann
wrote: 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. Idiot Another thought-provoking and irrefutable post by Mainz's greatest export, Peter the Klöwn. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign
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 |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flawforces Linux, Windows redesign
On 2018-01-05 10:09, Doomsdrzej wrote:
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%. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208394 0 slowdown for the Meltdown fix. 2.5% slowdown for the Spectre fix in one of three benchmarks. Belying what you say above. So your "credentials" are decaying quick. [3rd party benchmarks] Not clear if the fix will be "improved" in 10.13.3 (the next update) and whether that will impact CPU. Mac OS is already a slow piece of poop that caters to the dumbest elements of society so I doubt that any of the retards using it would notice a slowdown of their slow as molasses operating system no matter how significant it was. That's just bad math. If something is slow, then a percentage slowdown is much more noticeable than the same percentage slowdown on a faster machine. What in particular is slower about Mac OS? BTW, Mac OS is generally used by people with higher educational achievement as well as higher income brackets. But then ... -- “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 |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign
Doomsdrzej wrote:
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. What the right-wing propagandists always "forget" is that, while there are compensating mechanisms that tend to bring the climate back to an equilibrium, the forces are gentle, and they work on the time-scale of millennia. They cannot cope with a violent change in conditions occurring over a short period of time, as in the last 100 years. -- "Tell us again how Windows 95 is not DOS-based, Peter." - "Slimer", AKA "Doomsdrzej", putting his ignorance on display |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flawforces Linux, Windows redesign
On 2018-01-05 10:32, chrisv wrote:
What the right-wing propagandists always "forget" is that, while there are compensating mechanisms that tend to bring the climate back to an equilibrium, the forces are gentle, and they work on the time-scale of millennia. They cannot cope with a violent change in conditions occurring over a short period of time, as in the last 100 years. +10 -- “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 |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flawforces Linux, Windows redesign
On 2018-01-05 10:13, Doomsdrzej wrote:
On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 10:04:06 +0100, Peter Köhlmann wrote: 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. Idiot Another thought-provoking and irrefutable post by Mainz's greatest export, Peter the Klöwn. A funny thing about your sort is you believe that putting down others makes your point valid and that resonates in your little echo chambers as some sort of truth. While there is wisdom in crowds, that only works when everyone's decision is independent. You have the independence of a particularly dull sheep. Why alpha-idiots like Twump make little honest effort to enlist you - not worth the expense - you come near free. Meanwhile scientists worldwide are investigating climate change and with each passing year narrowing the doubt about current anthropogenic climate change to the statistical exclusion of all other causes. -- “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 |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flawforces Linux, Windows redesign
On 2018-01-05 10:51, Wolf K wrote:
So, in order to reduce the performance hit, would it make sense to redesign the CPU with a larger on-board cache to store both kernel and user memory? Or, what am I missing in the protected memory concept? Ignoring that the only fix will be in future (or currently in pre-production) CPU's, the fix could be done with the same sized caches but correctly implemented. It could be the "correct fix" is itself less efficient overall than the goal (execution). It could be that such a fix would reduce the amount of cache available to Kernel/User space and thus have an impact too. New CPU's can have the luxury of more cache in any case and so can add even more to help with the issue. Wow. What a long winded way to say: "who knows?". Anyhow, I think most users will see no performance hit. I mean, how many people are rendering CGI on their laptops? Etc. I'm more worried about server farms used by big data, banks, ISPs etc. These already show performance hits tied to time-of-day, as user access (ie demand) varies. Even a few % slowdown in overall throughput will be noticeable at peak demand times. That depends on the server farms. Well designed they scale up cheaply (upscale effort) but expensively (hardware + energy). There is cost. AWS style platforms can upscale dynamically according to load (and the contract with the service client). Of course the service client will be sad to see his costs with the platform go up and have to find a way to get more revenue. All that said, the 5 - 30% load increase seems to be speculative / theoretical. And maybe you're right that it will mostly affect people using their computers to the hilt a lot of the time and not most "casual" users. Alas, I do render videos often but can't say my Mac (OS 10.13.2) has seen any impact (nor can I say it hasn't - nothing noticable IOW). Maybe under 10.13.3 when Apple are rumoured to "complete" their defense against Meltdown and/or Spectre we'll perceive the hit. -- “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 |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign
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 |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign
On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 10:29:31 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
BTW, Mac OS is generally used by people with higher educational achievement as well as higher income brackets. But then ... Pity the only available vbox for macOS has no sound. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign
On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 10:29:31 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote: On 2018-01-05 10:09, Doomsdrzej wrote: 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%. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208394 0 slowdown for the Meltdown fix. 2.5% slowdown for the Spectre fix in one of three benchmarks. Belying what you say above. So your "credentials" are decaying quick. [3rd party benchmarks] Not clear if the fix will be "improved" in 10.13.3 (the next update) and whether that will impact CPU. Since I don't want to just take Apple's word for it or that of one of its zealots, I prefer to look at actual benchmarks. I don't believe Windows zealots either and want raw data. Here is Phoronix, a Linux site, showing the performance impact of the patch: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux-415-x86pti&num=2 Now, you can be classy and apologize or continue being a dick. I imagine that you'll choose the latter. Mac OS is already a slow piece of poop that caters to the dumbest elements of society so I doubt that any of the retards using it would notice a slowdown of their slow as molasses operating system no matter how significant it was. That's just bad math. If something is slow, then a percentage slowdown is much more noticeable than the same percentage slowdown on a faster machine. What in particular is slower about Mac OS? Filesystem, application load time, game performance, OpenGL in general, etc.. Here's a link on game performance from 2015. There is no reason to believe that things are any better today. https://hooktube.com/watch?v=hRfqNuyyPvQ BTW, Mac OS is generally used by people with higher educational achievement as well as higher income brackets. But then ... What an irrelevant thing to mention. Be quiet. |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign
On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 10:43:48 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote: On 2018-01-05 10:13, Doomsdrzej wrote: On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 10:04:06 +0100, Peter Köhlmann wrote: 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. Idiot Another thought-provoking and irrefutable post by Mainz's greatest export, Peter the Klöwn. A funny thing about your sort is you believe that putting down others makes your point valid and that resonates in your little echo chambers as some sort of truth. Says the hypocrite who just defended someone calling another poster an "idiot." While there is wisdom in crowds... .... there is none in your posts. *plonk* |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|