On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 06:37:08 -0800 [email protected] wrote: > An ongoing demand exists for embedded systems. In principle, a > cpu with no ME will be cheaper than one with a ME. [...]
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 16:44:29 +0100 Daniel Tarrero <[email protected]> wrote: [...] > take a look at this, can help in finding Intel MEs: > https://communities.intel.com/docs/DOC-5693 I don't think looking at individual CPUs is a good approach. You should rather look at which Intel platform don't have an ME. For instance if you take Nehalem[1], the first core i.7 generation platform, the management engine is inside the chipset. I don't know any way of having a Nehalem CPU work on hardware lacking such management engine. Looking at the availability or the lack of certain features such as vPro[2] or even AMT[3] is not a reliable way to get confirmation that the machine has or doesn't have a management engine: -> AMT is only a firmware, it doesn't need to run on the management engine, it did run on Intel Ethernet cards at the beginning. The management engine also can run other firmwares, recent chromebooks don't ship with AMT, they have some other smaller firmware running on the management engine. -> vPro[2] is also very vague and doesn't seem to be sufficient to positively or negatively identify the presence of a management engine. I think that documenting it is important. I've started that in coreboot wiki[4], but it needs more machines and Intel platforms. Maybe some recent Intel platforms targeted for low power embedded products, such as Quark, don't have an ME. I wonder what freedom issues they have (if any) and how powerful they are. Someone should check. References: ----------- [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nehalem_%28microarchitecture%29 [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_vPro [3]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Active_Management_Technology [4]https://www.coreboot.org/ME Denis.
pgp3syz7YZsMp.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
