Originally posted by Xaero_Vincent
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Bisected: The Unfortunate Reason Linux 4.20 Is Running Slower
Collapse
X
-
Ouch... I thought that they had now gotten to the point where they improve performance by swapping out existing software fixes for ones that do the same job with less of a performance hit (like retpolines), but it would seem like I was wrong about this and Intel keeps taking a beating in these fixes.
I've already heard about how some particularly low margin cloud service providers finding that the combined performance impact of previous Spectre and Meltdown fixes have put them dangerously close or even on the wrong side of the break-even point and this doesn't exactly help in that regard. Even as someone who considers Intel the Monsanto of the semiconductor industry I do hope that fixes improving performance will be merged within the next few weeks.
Something that worries me personally is that AMD hasn't been invulnerable to Spectre either and you'd think that these fixes would to some extent at least also affect AMD hardware. Is AMD in the clear or is it just that they haven't yet merged the patches that enable this on AMD hardware, kind of like it was with some of the previous mitigations for speculative execution vulnerabilities? That would be genuinely nice to know.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by Zan Lynx View PostI wonder if Hyperthreading is still worth it? Would it be interesting to run a speed test with it disabled?
All hyperthreading does is spoofing a core to the OS as 2 "logical" cores and force-feed 2 threads on a single core, hoping that unused parts of the pipeline can complete more work per clock. This may, or may not improve performance. In some cases it can even lower performance. But if you have enough cores for your software it makes no sense to use HT. I can't see how someone with 8+ physical cores would really care for HT on a desktop pc.
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Originally posted by L_A_G View PostOuch... I thought that they had now gotten to the point where they improve performance by swapping out existing software fixes for ones that do the same job with less of a performance hit (like retpolines), but it would seem like I was wrong about this and Intel keeps taking a beating in these fixes.
I've already heard about how some particularly low margin cloud service providers finding that the combined performance impact of previous Spectre and Meltdown fixes have put them dangerously close or even on the wrong side of the break-even point and this doesn't exactly help in that regard. Even as someone who considers Intel the Monsanto of the semiconductor industry I do hope that fixes improving performance will be merged within the next few weeks.
Something that worries me personally is that AMD hasn't been invulnerable to Spectre either and you'd think that these fixes would to some extent at least also affect AMD hardware. Is AMD in the clear or is it just that they haven't yet merged the patches that enable this on AMD hardware, kind of like it was with some of the previous mitigations for speculative execution vulnerabilities? That would be genuinely nice to know.
- Likes 4
Comment
-
Originally posted by yoshi314 View Posthow many more speedhacks there are in intel cpus that sacrifice security? it just never ends.Last edited by mvaar; 16 November 2018, 06:20 PM.
- Likes 4
Comment
-
Originally posted by Xaero_Vincent View PostSeven more speculative execution vulnerabilities found. An absolute disaster for CPU design. I guess the answer is remove Hyper Threading from mainstream processors and bump up the core count and remove speculative decision making from the architecture and offset the losses with clock speed increases. 7 to 8 GHz would be good? I guess smarter and more efficient processor design means worse security.
Anyway, it looks like 7nm/7nm+/5nm are going to increase core counts significantly, so HT will lose most of its importance.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
want your performance back? here is the magical "word": nospectre_v2
spectre is a lower security threat than meltdown and this level of performance degradation is absolutely unacceptable and the only logical choice is to disable the mitigation as ive already done
- Likes 4
Comment
-
It looks like this should affect AMD hardware too:
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018...t-performance/
My guess is is that Michael is testing AMD hardware that lacks the microcode update that gives stibp support. AMD’s website says that he needs to update his BIOS to get it:
Last edited by ryao; 16 November 2018, 06:23 PM.
- Likes 2
Comment
Comment