| Submit your comments on this article |
| Science & Technology |
| Warning: BSD - Developer states Intel Core 2 dangerously buggy: |
| 2007-06-28 |
| This looks scary enough to post here. It might not be as bad as he is stating but then again we remember the floating point bugs in the first Pentium processors - I need to note as a disclaimer that I am posting this on an AMD dual core that for all I know might have it's own set of horrible bugs. Various developers are busy implementing workarounds for serious bugs in Intel's Core 2 cpu. These processors are buggy as hell, and some of these bugs don't just cause development/debugging problems, but will *ASSUREDLY* be exploitable from userland code. As is typical, BIOS vendors will be very late providing workarounds / fixes for these processors bugs. Some bugs are unfixable and cannot be worked around. Intel only provides detailed fixes to BIOS vendors and large operating system groups. Open Source operating systems are largely left in the cold. Full (current) errata from Intel:Errata PDF here As is typical, BIOS vendors will be very late providing workarounds / fixes for these processors bugs. Some bugs are unfixable and cannot be worked around. Intel only provides detailed fixes to BIOS vendors and large operating system groups. Open Source operating systems are largely left in the cold. Full (current) errata from Intel:Errata PDF here As is typical, BIOS vendors will be very late providing workarounds / fixes for these processors bugs. Some bugs are unfixable and cannot be worked around. Intel only provides detailed fixes to BIOS vendors and large operating system groups. Open Source operating systems are largely left in the cold. Full (current) errata from Intel:Errata PDF here - We bet there are many more errata not yet announced -- every month this file gets larger. - Intel understates the impact of these erraata very significantly. Almost all operating systems will run into these bugs. - Basically the MMU simply does not operate as specified/implimented in previous generations of x86 hardware. It is not just buggy, but Intel has gone further and defined "new ways to handle page tables" (see page 58). - Some of these bugs are along the lines of "buffer overflow"; where a write-protect or non-execute bit for a page table entry is ignored. Others are floating point instruction non-coherencies, or memory corruptions -- outside of the range of permitted writing for the process -- running common instruction sequences. - All of this is just unbelievable to many of us. An easier summary document for some people to read: Gif format summary Note that some errata like AI65, AI79, AI43, AI39, AI90, AI99 scare the hell out of us. Some of these are things that cannot be fixed in running code, and some are things that every operating system will do until about mid-2008, because that is how the MMU has always been managed on all generations of Intel/AMD/whoeverelse hardware. Now Intel is telling people to manage the MMU's TLB flushes in a new and different way. Yet even if we do so, some of the errata listed are unaffected by doing so. As I said before, hiding in this list are 20-30 bugs that cannot be worked around by operating systems, and will be potentially exploitable. I would bet a lot of money that at least 2-3 of them are. For instance, AI90 is exploitable on some operating systems (but not OpenBSD running default binaries). At this time, I cannot recommend purchase of any machines based on the Intel Core 2 until these issues are dealt with (which I suspect will take more than a year). Intel must be come more transparent. (While here, I would like to say that AMD is becoming less helpful day by day towards open source operating systems too, perhaps because their serious errata lists are growing rapidly too). |
| Posted by:3dc |
| #4 Er, the BSD-derived OSX runs on dual-core Intels. Apple certainly hasn't shown any concern. And concerning the number of dual-core machines around, it doesn't appear there are very easily tripped. He may be discussing odd states the processors can get into after very specific series of instructions. |
| Posted by: Rob Crawford 2007-06-28 19:20 |
| #3 These are subtle bugs ...so subtle you need a Ouija Board? >:) btw thanks for the Developer BDS Open Source thingy. I'll pass it along to my Brother in Law.. |
| Posted by: RD 2007-06-28 14:49 |
| #2 He's had no problems with Intel chips and had no returns or complaints due to Intel chips. These are subtle bugs, and may not be exploited as yet. I'll go with the opinion of Theo de Raadt, leader of OpenBSD, one of the most secure general-purpose operating systems available. |
| Posted by: KBK 2007-06-28 13:41 |
| #1 3dc, ima not no expert, 'puterwise 'K.... I was just talking w/ the brother in law this AM, and in the last 6 or 7 months he's sold over a 600-700 Intel Chips, either stand alone, or in computers or servers he's made from scratch. He's had no problems with Intel chips and had no returns or complaints due to Intel chips.. He builds them like you do 3dc.. He hasn't had any trouble with these for instance. Intel Xeon 5160 Dual Core 3.0GHZ /for servers Intel® Core™2 Duo Intel Core 2 Extreme Processor E6800 [he has sold about 15 Extreme Processors + - , and has a few in stock ] I'll try and answer any questions.. but don't expect too much LOL! |
| Posted by: RD 2007-06-28 12:36 |
