81–90 of 159 posts
So, realistically, how much performance did your average OpenBSD server just lose from following this mitigation?
If you read https://www.openbsd.org/goals.html, the word "performance" does not appear.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably in most cases. Vmware have disclaimers in the mitigation options that preclude turning off HT, meaning, use at your own risk. [1] I am still waiting on a comment from Linode [2] Openstack have some knobs you can adjust, but it really depends on your workloads and what risk you are willing to accept. [3] AWS have their own custom hypervisor and are said to have worked around the issue. [4] Amazon had info on…
AWS is able to get custom Intel Processors due to their size (c5 instances have a custom Intel processor).
Is not it better just to disable Javascript instead of cutting your CPU performance?
FTA >>> We are having to do research by reading other operating systems. Si Intel cooperates with business partners like apple/windows and not with open source. Does it mean that Apple and Windows can claim to be more secure because they have access to the information needed to fix Intel's issues ?
FTA >>> We are having to do research by reading other operating systems. Si Intel cooperates with business partners like apple/windows and not with open source. Does it mean that Apple and Windows can claim to be more secure because they have access to the information needed to fix Intel's issues ?
Intel cooperates with organizations that obey embargoes and don't badmouth their partners in public, like Red Hat, Canonical, and probably the Linux Foundation. Intel does not cooperate with OpenBSD.
Does this mean AMD hyperthreading has a performance + security advantage over currently shipping Intel processors? Edit: https://www.amd.com/en/corporate/security-updates > 8/14/18 – Updated: As in the case with Meltdown, we believe our processors are not susceptible to these new speculative execution attack variants: L1 Terminal Fault – SGX (also known as Foreshadow) CVE 2018-3615, L1 Terminal Fault – OS/SMM (also k…
FTA >>> We are having to do research by reading other operating systems. Si Intel cooperates with business partners like apple/windows and not with open source. Does it mean that Apple and Windows can claim to be more secure because they have access to the information needed to fix Intel's issues ?
Intel cooperates with organizations that obey embargoes and don't badmouth their partners in public, like Red Hat, Canonical, and probably the Linux Foundation. Intel does not cooperate with OpenBSD.
I've long felt that there's something less than half-baked about the multi CPU architecture we're currently using. The hacky contortions HFT coders have come up with to avoid things like False Sharing strike me as a big red flag. https://mechanical-sympathy.blogspot.com/2011/07/false-shari... How about an architecture more like Erlang's, where you have independent processes with their own CPU core, where each has the…
Parallelism is inherent in most problems but due to current programming models and architectures which have evolved from a sequential paradigm, the parallelism exploited is restricted. We believe that the most efficient parallel execution is achieved when applications are represented as graphs of operations and data, which can then be mapped for execution on a modular and scalable processing-in-memory architecture. In this paper, we present PHOENIX, a general-purpose architecture composed of many Processing Elements (PEs) with memory storage and efficient computational logic units interconnected with a mesh network-on-chip. A preliminary design of PHOENIX shows it is possible to include 10,000 PEs with a storage capacity of 0.6GByte on a 1.5cm2 chip using 14nm technology. PHOENIX may achieve 6TFLOPS with a power consumption of up to 42W, which results in a peak energy efficiency of at least 143GFLOPS/W. A simple estimate shows that for a 4K FFT, PHOENIX achieves 117GFLOPS/W which is more than double of what is achieved by state-of-the-art systems.
https://memsys.io/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/20171003-Memsys...
Does anyone know the best way to disable hyperthreading in OSX? The only thing I found was this: https://www.whatroute.net/cpusetter.html