One can argue of going the signed firmware route for security is a good or a bad practice and I agree with you that the unbrickable design of the A20 is a better one, but that is irrelevant in the case of Ryzen chips: They have already been taped out so we have to work with what we are given. Going completely free with risc v would be cool but that is years away.
On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 8:23 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <[email protected] > wrote: > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 3:46 PM, Bill Kontos <[email protected]> wrote: > > > asking for a full unconditional release of everything including releasing > > the signed keys for loading firmware( that doesn't make any sense, if you > > have a system that needs a signed key but the key is public what's the > point > > ?). > > exactly: the point is, they should never have added secret-key > firmware signing into the hardware in the first place. *that's* the > point. > > > press coverage they wanted). So don't get your hopes too high on this. > > yep. which is why i'm recommending they go "clean slate" and go with > RISC-V with x86 part-acceleration. i looked at the numbers from a > 2015 paper on the FP implementation in rocket: it's a whopping 40% > more power-efficient for the same performance. > > l. > > _______________________________________________ > arm-netbook mailing list [email protected] > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to [email protected] >
_______________________________________________ arm-netbook mailing list [email protected] http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to [email protected]
