Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Wednesday January 31 2018, @05:14PM   Printer-friendly
from the doesn't-raid-fix-this? dept.

Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:

In 2015, Microsoft senior engineer Dan Luu forecast a bountiful harvest of chip bugs in the years ahead.

"We've seen at least two serious bugs in Intel CPUs in the last quarter, and it's almost certain there are more bugs lurking," he wrote. "There was a time when a CPU family might only have one bug per year, with serious bugs happening once every few years, or even once a decade, but we've moved past that."

Thanks to growing chip complexity, compounded by hardware virtualization, and reduced design validation efforts, Luu argued, the incidence of hardware problems could be expected to increase.

This month's Meltdown and Spectre security flaws that affect chip designs from AMD, Arm, and Intel to varying degrees support that claim. But there are many other examples.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 01 2018, @01:27AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 01 2018, @01:27AM (#631286)

    Intel has beefed up validation after various issues--we didn't lack for money in the department. You mention spreading cost out--that's why server chips are so expensive. You have expensive people like me validating chip designs that are sold in fewer quantifies than the latest Android.

  • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday February 01 2018, @12:56PM

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Thursday February 01 2018, @12:56PM (#631450)

    that's why server chips are so expensive. You have expensive people like me validating chip designs that are sold in fewer quantifies than the latest Android.

    So, I get tiered marketing and that you need to sell some product at a higher price point, but... wouldn't it make a kind of sense to pour the heaviest validation onto the line that sells the most copies? Maybe not a marketing "juice 'em for maximal profits" kind of sense, but a "don't be dicks to the world" kind of sense?

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]