Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!mcgill-vision!snorkelwacker!usc!samsung!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uflorida!haven!mimsy!chris From: chris@mimsy.umd.edu (Chris Torek) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: RISC vs. CISC? No, OS bug executing data... Message-ID: <26507@mimsy.umd.edu> Date: 12 Sep 90 13:24:09 GMT References: Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742 Lines: 19 In article aglew@crhc.uiuc.edu (Andy Glew) writes: >A short while back there was a brief flurry about a program that >caused an OS crash when run on a variety of RISCs, but seemed to have >no problems on CISCs. > >As I recall it, it executed data (and the OS wasn't handling traps >well). Somebody eventually found a CISC it also bombed on. Right. (The CISC was the 80386, as I recall. Current 80386s have that bug fixed.) I was extremely tempted to follow up the 80386-bug with something saying `ah, yes, this clearly demonstrates the superiority of CISC architectures' ... so now I am: :-) Note that, on all the machines that crashed *except one*, it was a bug in the OS and not in the chip. The one exception? A CISC. -- In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 405 2750) Domain: chris@cs.umd.edu Path: uunet!mimsy!chris