A more technical writeup on what can be done to address #Meltdown and #Spectre in future CPU designs. If there's interest, I can write a longer version with graphics and so on:https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/addressing-meltdown-spectre-future-silicon-jon-masters/ …
-
-
Replying to @jonmasters @solardiz
I don't see anything (here, or from Intel) addressing Spectre variant 1, which is really the root cause of the problem. Variant 2 wouldn't exist without the flaw behind variant 1.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RichFelker @solardiz
That’s because I don’t believe variant 1 has a straightforward hardware fix. But it is very low overhead to do it in software, so I think that’s where it ends up for the moment...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jonmasters @solardiz
There's no universal sw fix. It requires hacks everywhere that might be affected. That's not viable (many will be missed) much less sustainable.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RichFelker @solardiz
Right - it’s a compiler level thing or you just have hacks. And I agree. But the big hammer isn’t going to be viable so we *will* have hacks
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jonmasters @solardiz
No, it's a kernel-level thing or you just have hacks. Inability to safely run existing binaries for the baseline ISA means you're effectively not compatible with the original ISA/ABI... in which case, why stick with x86 at all?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I agree we *will* have hacks for the forseeable future, but the hacks will be partial mitigations for safety in existing broken chips. New chips need full safety against Spectre variant 1.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.