Hacker News Reader

The suggestion to invalidate cache is also in ACPI 6.2A 16.1.1.2 Example 2: S1 Sleeping State Implementation (page 783)

http://www.uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/ACPI%206_2...

This was over a decade ago, I'm not too worried about it.

It's pretty obvious that when people at Microsoft say "processor vendor" it's a euphemism for "Intel".

Not as true anymore now that they support arm but... Still kinda true.

You do know that the 64 bit version of Windows XP was made for AMD processors before intel had any.

We also had Transmeta. I bet all of them have some kinks just as different models from the same vendor have different bugs etc. that require special handling.

Meltdown/Spectre is just a recent and very visible artifact that would demonstrate this.

Yeah I know. But I think at MS they work closely with Intel and think of other vendors as not as important.

I did work there too, and to be clear, did not witness anything like this. Just a personal opinion/hunch.

The comment with Intel was already mentioned in 2008 at https://deadracoon.livejournal.com/87049.html

He's my old boss :)