| ▲ | toast0 3 days ago |
| Didn't they have the F00F bug? (Thanks, I keep misremembering) How much more Pentium do you want? |
|
| ▲ | oakwhiz 3 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| No, the Quarks did not have the f00f bug, that would have been funny though. |
| |
| ▲ | numpad0 3 days ago | parent [-] | | Didn't they have issues with `LOCK CMPXCHG`(not the 8B)? This is out of my depth and I am not sure, but it sounds similar to the f00f bug. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Quark#Segfault_bug | | |
| ▲ | neerajsi 3 days ago | parent [-] | | Yes, they did have the bug with the lock prefix. IOT people at Microsoft got NT booting on the Quark and we ran into that problem. I wound up writing a small tool to patch out all the lock prefixes. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | accrual 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I believe the F00F bug was patched out pretty quickly in the Pentium's B2 stepping. Nevertheless, some OSs still have mitigations if they detect an affected CPU (e.g. OpenBSD). |
| |
| ▲ | epcoa 3 days ago | parent [-] | | It wasn’t even discovered until 1997, so no that wasn’t exactly early in the Pentium lifecycle at all. There were multiple models and millions of devices affected. |
|
