delamon

You surely meant capacitors, not transistors

How so? PGO might indicate that most of the time arguments are in bounds, but that's not enough. It has to be a proof with 100% certainty before bound checks can be removed

Or even use acl(5), which is simplier than making arbitrary groups.

You can, in fact, give compiler a hint wether the branch will be predictable or not. E.g. clang has __builtin_unpredictable().

He only gets 4-5Gbps in the other direction.

Inderect call cost is a few cycles, if predicted. Now, you can argue, that it may be mispredicted and misprediction would cost about 20-30 cycles. But if it is mispredicted, then you are not calling into allocator often enough. And if you don't hammer it hard, then why do you care about preformance?

can't help myself: how common to see code like https://github.com/oven-sh/bun/blob/main/src/bun_core/string... instead of simple ilog2()? I guess, ut somewhat explains how they got 700k+ lines of code

yes

I assume you mean container, not VM. But yes, container makes it harder.

The attack gives you ability to overwrite any cached page. So you don't need to be root to "edit" /etc/passwd.

setuid binaries are not the only way to get root. E.g. one can change /etc/crontab or /etc/passwd. Or add trojan to /bin/ls and wait until admin type 'ls'

Apparently it is both...

If you "forget" to mark COW memory pointer as no-write, the net effect would be same, would it not? If I'm reading the diff correctly, the problem was that code missed to mark some pages as shared (aka no-write).

How would've memory safety helped here?

Another data point: AMD T14 G4 with s2idle draws about 0.4% per hour of sleep.

Lenovo sells ThinkPad T-series laptops as “Linux-supported.” However, if you happen to buy an AMD version of one of these laptops, you may be surprised by how poorly the Wi‑Fi works. It’s been several years since the T14 Gen4 was released, and yet the Wi‑Fi is still not stable.

Right, I misread the spec.

What kind of usage do you envision for 245TB drive with read speed of 3GB/sec?

QLC retention reported to be around 1 year in unpowered state. I would assume, that drive does background refresh, though. No idea what effect it has on total drive lifetime. It is still mean that if you use it for cold storage it has to be powered.

Zelic discovered 73 security problems with uutils, 7 critical, 11 of high impact, 29 of medium and rest is low.

Not really. PgUp, PgDown are missing. It is possible to configure software combination that would emulate them. But emulation is emulation.

This blog post is also worth noting: https://ciechanow.ski/gps/

What is wrong with peeking at process.env? It is a global map, after all. I assume, of course, that they don't mutate it.

Rust cannot help you if race condition crosses API boundary. No matter what language you use, you have to think about system as a whole. Failure to do that results in bugs like this

You can bump /proc/$firefox_pid/oom_score_adj to make it likely target. The easiest way is to make wrapper script that bumps the score and then starts firefox. All children will inherit the score.

IBM was producing in Japan T221 monitor staring from 2001. It had 3840x2160 LCD screen.

I've been trying to convert to Rust an in-memory database and failed. It is strictly single-threaded and full of intrusive lists. I tried hard to please borrow-checker, but one have little choice when internal structures are full of cycles. The result was ugly mess of Rc all over the place. I guess it is just an example of a problem that doesn't fit Rust well.

This makes me wonder: what performance cost Rust code pay due to inability represent cyclic structures efficiently? It seems people tend to design their data in way to please Rust and not in way that would be otherwise more performance efficient.

Right. So it is not that double-linked lists are inherently unsafe, it is (just) Rust ownership model cannot represent them (any other cyclic structures).

if your compiler unboxes the contained item into your nodes

Is there known compilers that can do that?

Can you elaborate, what key assumptions about memory safety linked lists break? Sure, double linked lists may have non-trivial ownership, but that doesn't compromise safety.