Re: Hyper-Threading Vulnerability

Alan Cox wrote:
> HT for most users is pretty irrelevant, its a neat idea but the
> benchmarks don't suggest its too big a hit

On real-world applications, I haven't seen HT boost performance by more
than 15% on a Pentium 4 -- and the usual gain is around 5%, if anything
at all. HT is a nice idea, but I don't enable it on my systems.

..Scott
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Hyper-Threading Vulnerability
    • From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
  • Re: Hyper-Threading Vulnerability
    • From: Grant Coady <[email protected]>
  • Re: Hyper-Threading Vulnerability
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>

• References:
  • Hyper-Threading Vulnerability
    • From: Gabor MICSKO <[email protected]>
  • Re: Hyper-Threading Vulnerability
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
  • Re: Hyper-Threading Vulnerability
    • From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [RCF] [PATCH] unprivileged mount/umount
• Next by Date: tickle nmi watchdog whilst doing serial writes.
• Previous by thread: Re: Hyper-Threading Vulnerability
• Next by thread: Re: Hyper-Threading Vulnerability
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]