the op seemed to be asking if we should remove speculative execution optimizations entirely to avoid these security problems. if we did that, the execution time, if averaged over all the workloads use, would be more than just 30% slower. the slowdown would be so large that i felt comfortable speaking in vague generalities, rather than providing specific benchmarks which pedants on the internet would also reply to in anger stating that it was not a real world workload or whatever. can’t win, so i don’t try.

OP seemed to be doing no such thing. Period.

If anything they’re asking the opposite! “Should we even be limiting the optimizations at all”

They start with the question “are manufacturers are forced to remove specific optimizations” (which replying to with “going to be worse than 30%” doesn't meaningfully answe) and immediately counter it with the above question “why remove any optimizations” (which your reply also doesn’t answer at all)

Calling out your arm wavy non-statement isn’t pedantry, asking that a comment be more than doomsaying noise isn’t either. Sorry if you feel otherwise.

there are some (non-optimal) estimates in the paper, tl;dr it's not great ;)

some more technical info here https://software.intel.com/security-software-guidance/insigh...

Except how many lay people were running workloads where serializing SGX loads is back breaking?

The tone of the original comment replied to definitely came from personal computing slant...

The problem isn't limited to SGX; it's just that nobody has tried it against e.g. the kernel. If someone figures that out you're going to be seeing that performance hit come there, too.

besides drm stuff like netflix (don't know if it's back breaking there), virtually none, of course

unless someone publishes a very practical attack from userspace, I don't think this will affect personal computing atm