|
|
Log in / Subscribe / Register

Another round of speculative-execution vulnerabilities

Another round of speculative-execution vulnerabilities

Posted Aug 10, 2023 7:59 UTC (Thu) by Wol (subscriber, #4433)
In reply to: Another round of speculative-execution vulnerabilities by farnz
Parent article: Another round of speculative-execution vulnerabilities

So, as farnz says, you appear to have completely mis-understood my argument and are arguing against a straw man.

Signals are carried by photons (or em waves, same(ish) thing) so the speed of light IS relevant, although from what others have said the telegraph effect is probably more important, and

My argument has repeatedly been prefixed with "IF components need to communicate" so okay, I'm not necessarily talking about clock cycles, but a single communication cycle has that upper limit. I'm not always clear in what I say, I know that, but if you make no attempt to understand me, I can't understand you either. So IFF a communication cycle equals a clock cycle, 5GHz is the maximum clock possible between two random components in a chip. Of course, splitting a communication clock cycle into multiple clock cycles can speed OTHER stuff up, but it makes no difference to the speed at which a signal travels across a chip.

(And of course, without communication a chip can't work.)

Cheers,
Wol


to post comments

Another round of speculative-execution vulnerabilities

Posted Aug 10, 2023 15:03 UTC (Thu) by farnz (subscriber, #17727) [Link]

A corollary of your argument is that Starlink satellites (communication clock rate of around 230 kHz) can be no higher than 1.3 km above the receiver, and Sky TV satellites (communication clock rate of 22 MHz or above) can be no higher than 13 metres above the receiver.

Another round of speculative-execution vulnerabilities

Posted Aug 10, 2023 16:23 UTC (Thu) by malmedal (subscriber, #56172) [Link]

Nobody is misunderstanding you, it is very easy to understand what you are saying. It's just that it is wrong.

However you seem to be unable to understand what people are saying, please read more carefully.

For instance there is no "telegraph effect" the "telegrapher's equations" are just Maxwell's equations applied to signals in a wire.

If you wish to be able to say anything intelligible about chips you need to understand what "pipelines" are in this context. This appears to be a major gap in your knowledge, you completely ignore it when people bring this up. It is not just a word, it is one of the fundamental concepts.

Already the 8088 had a pipeline, it is not a new concept.


Copyright © 2026, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds