Sponsored Content
The Lounge War Stories Linus Torvalds reply about Meltdown and Spectre. Post 303012272 by dodona on Thursday 1st of February 2018 03:41:01 PM
Old 02-01-2018
I read that with the 4.15 Kernel with build-in patches for the hypothetical problem comes with 15-30% performance loss. Immediately I thought 'wow, Intel, AMD and the hardware pushers will earn a lot of $'. I mean todays cpu is so fast that there isn't a need for a upgrade. However the hypothetical problem with the 15-30% performance loss is the need for an upgradeSmilie. Again everything comes down to $, and nothing else than $.Smilie
 

5 More Discussions You Might Find Interesting

1. Filesystems, Disks and Memory

What the best HD format for Unix & Linus

Hello people, Im just about to install linux and unix but would like to know what the best Partition type format is for both of them. Can anyone tell me Thankyou in advanced (1 Reply)
Discussion started by: jeffersno1
1 Replies

2. Filesystems, Disks and Memory

hard disk meltdown

I had an issue with a second hard disk in my machine. I have a sparc station running solaris 7. It was working fine but now it wont mount on boot up and when you try to mount it manually it gives an I/O error. I tried a different disk as a control which was fine. What I want to know is if my... (3 Replies)
Discussion started by: Henrik
3 Replies

3. News, Links, Events and Announcements

A Couple of Short Linus Torvalds Videos

This link is to a page that has two short videos that feature Linus Torvalds discussing the Linux kernel. After you watch the first video, scroll down some more to reach the second video. (0 Replies)
Discussion started by: Perderabo
0 Replies

4. What is on Your Mind?

Meltdown and Spectre CPU bugs

This seems a bit serious: Meltdown, Spectre: The password theft bugs at the heart of Intel CPUs • The Register Vulnerability Note VU#584653 - CPU hardware vulnerable to side-channel attacks Project Zero: Reading privileged memory with a side-channel (8 Replies)
Discussion started by: Scrutinizer
8 Replies

5. AIX

AIX 6.1, POWER5 and Spectre/Meltdown

Apologies for this newbie question. We have inherited an IBM p5 520 (9111-520) running AIX 6.1.0.0 which seems to be the base install and no further patches installed. Is this vulnerable to the Spectre/Meltdown threat? Are patches available? Looks like AIX 6.1.0.0 went 'end of support' in... (8 Replies)
Discussion started by: the_garbage
8 Replies
GIT-MERGE-BASE(1)						    Git Manual							 GIT-MERGE-BASE(1)

NAME
git-merge-base - Find as good common ancestors as possible for a merge SYNOPSIS
git merge-base [-a|--all] <commit> <commit>... DESCRIPTION
git merge-base finds best common ancestor(s) between two commits to use in a three-way merge. One common ancestor is better than another common ancestor if the latter is an ancestor of the former. A common ancestor that does not have any better common ancestor is a best common ancestor, i.e. a merge base. Note that there can be more than one merge base for a pair of commits. Among the two commits to compute the merge base from, one is specified by the first commit argument on the command line; the other commit is a (possibly hypothetical) commit that is a merge across all the remaining commits on the command line. As the most common special case, specifying only two commits on the command line means computing the merge base between the given two commits. As a consequence, the merge base is not necessarily contained in each of the commit arguments if more than two commits are specified. This is different from git-show-branch(1) when used with the --merge-base option. OPTIONS
-a, --all Output all merge bases for the commits, instead of just one. DISCUSSION
Given two commits A and B, git merge-base A B will output a commit which is reachable from both A and B through the parent relationship. For example, with this topology: o---o---o---B / ---o---1---o---o---o---A the merge base between A and B is 1. Given three commits A, B and C, git merge-base A B C will compute the merge base between A and a hypothetical commit M, which is a merge between B and C. For example, with this topology: o---o---o---o---C / / o---o---o---B / / ---2---1---o---o---o---A the result of git merge-base A B C is 1. This is because the equivalent topology with a merge commit M between B and C is: o---o---o---o---o / / o---o---o---o---M / / ---2---1---o---o---o---A and the result of git merge-base A M is 1. Commit 2 is also a common ancestor between A and M, but 1 is a better common ancestor, because 2 is an ancestor of 1. Hence, 2 is not a merge base. When the history involves criss-cross merges, there can be more than one best common ancestor for two commits. For example, with this topology: ---1---o---A / X / ---2---o---o---B both 1 and 2 are merge-bases of A and B. Neither one is better than the other (both are best merge bases). When the --all option is not given, it is unspecified which best one is output. AUTHOR
Written by Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org[1]> DOCUMENTATION
Documentation by David Greaves, Junio C Hamano and the git-list <git@vger.kernel.org[2]>. GIT
Part of the git(1) suite NOTES
1. torvalds@osdl.org mailto:torvalds@osdl.org 2. git@vger.kernel.org mailto:git@vger.kernel.org Git 1.7.1 07/05/2010 GIT-MERGE-BASE(1)
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:33 AM.
Unix & Linux Forums Content Copyright 1993-2022. All Rights Reserved.
Privacy Policy