> Have you _looked_ at the patches you are talking about? You should have - several of them bear your name.
This made me so nervous on his behalf
Linus Torvalds: “Somebody is pushing complete garbage for unclear reasons.”
41–50 of 702 posts
Re: Linus Torvalds: “Somebody is pushing complete garbage for unclear reasons.”
#42Why doesn't Intel just go to Linus and ask politely: "Ok, we f-ed up, here is a million dollars (or whatever, 10x his normal salary or something) can you please work with us tightly for some time? Thank you." I would really respect Intel if they would.
Why should they ask politely? It is not like the Linux mailing list would be polite environment.
Nothing against impolite environment, people make case for it daily here and I don't care. But it combined with the standard expectation that when someone else talks to them he should be always polite is getting funny in that context.
Re: Linus Torvalds: “Somebody is pushing complete garbage for unclear reasons.”
#43I think we should count ourselves lucky we have someone so good at spotting bullsh*t like this - and isn’t afraid to call it out as they sees it. Intel & friends have absolutely disgusted me lately, it could be all to easy to settle for less based on their standards, but let’s not let them set the standard - they’ve shown they can’t be trusted with quality and when they fail - they can’t be trusted to be transparent…
Intel transformed from a technology company to a management company. That somewhat explains their highly unreasonable behavior.
[deleted]
Re: Linus Torvalds: “Somebody is pushing complete garbage for unclear reasons.”
#44The most striking thing here is that Linus has apparently dismissed incompetence as a rational explanation. Yes, he is often brash, but usually he is accusing someone of sheer stupidity. He does not do that here. Linus alleges that we are being lied to - that we don’t know the full story, nor Intel’s motives. Furthermore, we are left to wonder if Microsoft is also being fed “bullshit” patches, and if they may be less…
The root question is what else is Intel trying to cover up with these garbage patches? Are they afraid of power leakage across gates allowing an attacker to gain a higher level of privilege in certain generations of silicon, and trying to cover it up with these patches (hence some of the seemingly crazy things they do)?
Re: Linus Torvalds: “Somebody is pushing complete garbage for unclear reasons.”
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Intel transformed from a technology company to a management company. That somewhat explains their highly unreasonable behavior.
Yea... and what about every other chip maker who also have the same exploits? Can someone explain whether AMD and Qualcomm licensed this tech or if they also independently made the same mistakes? Either way, we really haven't seen much activity from them either.
Re: Linus Torvalds: “Somebody is pushing complete garbage for unclear reasons.”
#46Are state actors or others trying to take advantage of meltdown needing fixes & patches to insert their own version of fixes & patches that end up benefiting them?
Re: Linus Torvalds: “Somebody is pushing complete garbage for unclear reasons.”
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
Intel transformed from a technology company to a management company. That somewhat explains their highly unreasonable behavior.
Yea... and what about every other chip maker who also have the same exploits? Can someone explain whether AMD and Qualcomm licensed this tech or if they also independently made the same mistakes? Either way, we really haven't seen much activity from them either.
There are fewer people trying to attack AMD's chips, they comprise such a small chunk of the installed CPU base out there that most attacker's won't be going after a system containing a CPU from AMD. This may change in the next year or two though, at which point the vulns that are likely in their Platform Security Processor may bite them in the ass.
Qualcomm on the other hand has taken the "fuck security" approach and failed to clean up their code and get it mainlined for nearly all of their common SoCs. Hence why Android phones are often trapped on old versions of Android when launched or shortly thereafter, long term security through the device lifecycle is a bad joke when Qualcomm and most other ARM vendors are involved.
Re: Linus Torvalds: “Somebody is pushing complete garbage for unclear reasons.”
#48I think we should count ourselves lucky we have someone so good at spotting bullsh*t like this - and isn’t afraid to call it out as they sees it. Intel & friends have absolutely disgusted me lately, it could be all to easy to settle for less based on their standards, but let’s not let them set the standard - they’ve shown they can’t be trusted with quality and when they fail - they can’t be trusted to be transparent…
Not only spot, but also invests the energy in calling it out and explaining it. Many business failures i've witnessed happened ultimately because nobody had the energy to cut down the bullshit forest that constantly regrows around a company.
> Not only spot, but also invests the energy in calling it out and explaining it.
Which is why FOSS is so important. Can you imagine a world where Linux was closed source? You’d never have any insight into security patches, or these discussions.
Re: Linus Torvalds: “Somebody is pushing complete garbage for unclear reasons.”
#49Run through the Linus drama filter, the only thing I get from this is "Linus doesn't like the Meltdown/Spectre patches'; Linus having issues with a patch is, well, not particularly newsworthy. Is there something more significant here than a bad first go at this?
I don't completely understand the technical issues, but reading between the lines I think the patches in question add super huge overhead. The overhead is so huge that nobody in their right mind would enable them by choice. However, the behaviour is governed by an opt-in configuration at boot time. What this means is that by default the patches will do nothing but if you opt in, you will get a huge performance hit. T…
Particularly interesting; the opt-in creates an incentive for OS vendors to comply, as being the only platform to go all-in would create an impression to the end user of poorer performance using your product.
Re: Linus Torvalds: “Somebody is pushing complete garbage for unclear reasons.”
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not only spot, but also invests the energy in calling it out and explaining it. Many business failures i've witnessed happened ultimately because nobody had the energy to cut down the bullshit forest that constantly regrows around a company.
> Not only spot, but also invests the energy in calling it out and explaining it. Which is why FOSS is so important. Can you imagine a world where Linux was closed source? You’d never have any insight into security patches, or these discussions.
Exactly, I’d love to see the state and flux of the Meltdown and Spectre patches for the various Windows kernels.