Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 11:22:49 -0700 (MST) From: Charles Mott <cmott@srv.net> To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Pentium bug (really) Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971112111910.1791B-100000@darkstar.home> In-Reply-To: <19971112122617.23109@netmonger.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 12 Nov 1997, Christopher Masto wrote: > The fact is that they have a workaround. The bug is bizzare, the > workaround may be just as bizzare - perhaps the failure doesn't occur > given certain register settings that don't affect anything else.. I > don't know, and I'm not particularly interested in speculating on how > it works. I would consider getting the patch and disassembling it, > but at this time I'd rather not paint myself into a legal corner. I can see no reason that Intel would not want such information openly available. On the other hand, if BSDI figured out a fix on their own, they would have an economic incentive (perhaps) to keep it proprietary. Charles Mott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.971112111910.1791B-100000>