Here we are - 3600 which was still under manufacture 2-3 years ago are not get patched. Shame on you AMD, if it is true.

  • 486@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    29 days ago

    As much as I like RISC-V, it is kind of ironic to suggest RISC-V ist the solution to this. At least as it stands, because of RISC-V’s simplicity, most if not all current RISC-V CPUs don’t even run microcode, so there is nothing to update/fix in case of a CPU bug. There’s even a very current example of this problem with that chinese RISC-V cpu that has this “GhostWrite” bug that allows every unpriviliged process to gain root access.

    • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      29 days ago

      As I said in an other reply, RISC-V is not the solution for the reason that they are perfect today. It is because it is not limited to being used by a few megacorporations that do whatever they want, but it allows competition where companies do what they need to become and remain a good choice.

      • 486@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        29 days ago

        I understood that. My point was rather that in this particular case (a CPU bug that could be fixed via microcode, but AMD chose not to do so for certain CPUs), RISC-V wouldn’t have been of any advantage, because there would be nothing to fix in the first place. Sure, one could introduce microcode for RISC-V and people have argued in favor of doing so for this exact reason, but the architecture was intentionally designed to not require microcode.