lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jan]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH] asm/generic: introduce if_nospec and nospec_barrier
Hi!

> > So this is in that same category, but yes, it's inconvenient.
>
> Disagreed, violently. CPU has to execute the instructions I ask it to
> execute, and if it executes *anything* else that reveals any information
> about the instructions that have *not* been executed, it's flawed.

I agree that's a flaw. Unfortunately... CPUs do execute instructions
you did not ask them to execute all the time.

Plus CPU designers forgot that cache state (and active row in DRAM) is
actually observable side-effect. ....and that's where we are today.

If you want, I have two systems with AMD Geode. One is PC. Neither is
very fast.

All the other general purpose CPUs I have -- and that includes
smartphones -- are likely out-of-order, and that means flawed.

So... situation is bad.

CPUs do execute intruction you did not ask them to execute. I don't
think that's reasonable to change.

I believe "right" fix would be for CPUs to treat even DRAM read as
side-effects, and adjust speculation accordingly. I'm not sure Intel/AMD
is going to do the right thing here.

Oh, I have an FPGA, too, if you want to play with RISC-V :-).

Best regards,
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-01-04 21:41    [W:0.147 / U:1.224 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site