What Linux architectures are not susceptible to meltdown orspectre?
 

In article
Nomen Nescio wrote:

Subject: What Linux architectures are not susceptible to
meltdown or spectre

The problem is chip based, not OS based.

Right. But there are other chips on which Linux runs, such as various
RISC chips. What currently available computers use one of these other
chips?

So all OSs are susceptible.

Not those running on chips other than Intel, AMD, or ARM.

I don't have any issues with my Alphas.

But then Alpha processors were designed by smarter engineers
than Intel's H1B clowns.

What Linux architectures are not susceptible to meltdown or spectre?
 

Nomen Nescio wrote:
In article
Nomen Nescio wrote:
Subject: What Linux architectures are not susceptible to
meltdown or spectre
The problem is chip based, not OS based.
Right. But there are other chips on which Linux runs, such as various
RISC chips. What currently available computers use one of these other
chips?

So all OSs are susceptible.
Not those running on chips other than Intel, AMD, or ARM.

I don't have any issues with my Alphas.

But then Alpha processors were designed by smarter engineers
than Intel's H1B clowns.


One might be surprised to find out how many of those Intel and AMD chip people
were also the ones who worked on Alpha.

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail:
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486

What Linux architectures are not susceptible to meltdown or spectre?
 

On 29 Jan 2018, DaveFroble posted some
:

Nomen Nescio wrote:
In article
Nomen Nescio wrote:
Subject: What Linux architectures are not susceptible to
meltdown or spectre
The problem is chip based, not OS based.
Right. But there are other chips on which Linux runs, such as
various RISC chips. What currently available computers use one of
these other chips?

So all OSs are susceptible.
Not those running on chips other than Intel, AMD, or ARM.

I don't have any issues with my Alphas.

But then Alpha processors were designed by smarter engineers
than Intel's H1B clowns.


One might be surprised to find out how many of those Intel and AMD
chip people were also the ones who worked on Alpha.

They worked on the "Itanic" chips and Athlon, not x86/x64. Intel found
ways to cost sabotage most of their work until they left for IBM and
Broadcom. Some of those from AMD followed suit after suffering from poor
technology decisions and lousy marketing.

What Linux architectures are not susceptible to meltdown orspectre?
 

On 01/29/2018 04:47 PM, DaveFroble wrote:
Nomen Nescio wrote:
In article
Nomen Nescio wrote:
Subject: What Linux architectures are not susceptible to
meltdown or spectre
Â* The problem is chip based, not OS based.
Right.Â* But there are other chips on which Linux runs, such as various
RISC chips.Â* What currently available computers use one of these other
chips?

Â*So all OSs are susceptible.
Not those running on chips other than Intel, AMD, or ARM.

I don't have any issues with my Alphas.

But then Alpha processors were designed by smarter engineers than
Intel's H1B clowns.


One might be surprised to find out how many of those Intel and AMD chip
people were also the ones who worked on Alpha.


I was being nice and not mentioning this. :-)

bill

What Linux architectures are not susceptible to meltdown orspectre?
 

In article
DaveFroble wrote:

Nomen Nescio wrote:
In article
Nomen Nescio wrote:
Subject: What Linux architectures are not susceptible to
meltdown or spectre
The problem is chip based, not OS based.
Right. But there are other chips on which Linux runs, such as various
RISC chips. What currently available computers use one of these other
chips?

So all OSs are susceptible.
Not those running on chips other than Intel, AMD, or ARM.

I don't have any issues with my Alphas.

But then Alpha processors were designed by smarter engineers
than Intel's H1B clowns.


One might be surprised to find out how many of those Intel and AMD chip people
were also the ones who worked on Alpha.

Really? Those DEC/Alpha people were working for Intel in 1995?

--
History is amazingly resistant to left wing democrat attempts to
revise it. That's why the Soviet Union failed. Dogma lacking a
foundation will always fail.

What Linux architectures are not susceptible to meltdown or spectre?
 

Meltdown is the result of an error made by Intel. Some Intel processors are
susceptable to it. It is not that difficult to work around in the Unix world,
but it is fairly easy to exploit if that has not been done.

Spectre is a more fundamental exploit, and it's likely the first of a whole
new class of timing-related exploits. It's difficult to take advantage of
compared with Meltdown. However, any processor with a sufficiently precise
timer and low-jitter system clock that uses branch prediction is vulnerable.
Which means just about everything post-vax, pretty much. This is a far more
alarming thing, not really even related to Meltdown.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

What Linux architectures are not susceptible to meltdown orspectre?
 

In article
Bill Gunshannon wrote:

On 01/29/2018 04:47 PM, DaveFroble wrote:
Nomen Nescio wrote:
In article
Nomen Nescio wrote:
Subject: What Linux architectures are not susceptible to
meltdown or spectre
Â* The problem is chip based, not OS based.
Right.Â* But there are other chips on which Linux runs, such as various
RISC chips.Â* What currently available computers use one of these other
chips?

Â*So all OSs are susceptible.
Not those running on chips other than Intel, AMD, or ARM.

I don't have any issues with my Alphas.

But then Alpha processors were designed by smarter engineers than
Intel's H1B clowns.


One might be surprised to find out how many of those Intel and AMD chip
people were also the ones who worked on Alpha.


I was being nice and not mentioning this. :-)

You're both being thick.

The problem has been around since the mid 90's. The Alpha teams
weren't sold until 5-6 years later.