Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2018 18:36:08 -0500 From: Paul Pathiakis <pathiaki2@yahoo.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Response to Meltdown and Spectre Message-ID: <71736b45-cbff-36d6-81ee-8e945375779c@yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <CA%2BtpaK2o1nbY2W2JVRtogN=P2VM9rag_dodK=GtLWgKwNsYZkg@mail.gmail.com> References: <CY1PR01MB12472D916F78A638731ECCE68FFB0@CY1PR01MB1247.prod.exchangelabs.com> <23154.11945.856955.523027@jerusalem.litteratus.org> <5A726B60.7040606@gmail.com> <92120E50-19A7-4A44-90DF-505243D77259@kreme.com> <CA%2BtpaK2o1nbY2W2JVRtogN=P2VM9rag_dodK=GtLWgKwNsYZkg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Yes, please explain. AMD stated up front that they weren't vulnerable to 1 and were almost 0-potential for the others. Just a plain better design. They, then, reiterated the very same thing. From what I've seen, AMD has a done a good job of being on top of their 'non-issue'. P. On 02/01/2018 18:04, Adam Vande More wrote: > On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 3:48 PM, @lbutlr <kremels@kreme.com> wrote: > >> the trouble is that AMD's behavior has been at least as bad as Intel's, if >> not worse, in regards to Meltdown, >> > Can you explain what provoked this assertion? >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?71736b45-cbff-36d6-81ee-8e945375779c>