Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5 | From | Robert Love <> | Date | 04 Oct 2001 19:47:10 -0400 |
| |
On Thu, 2001-10-04 at 19:26, Benjamin LaHaise wrote: > Frankly I'm sick of this entire discussion where people claim that no > form of interrupt throttling is ever needed. It's an emergency measure > that is needed under some circumstances as very few drivers properly > protect against this kind of DoS. Drivers that do things correctly will > never trigger the hammer. Plus it's configurable. If you'd bothered to > read and understand the rest of this thread you wouldn't have posted.
Agreed. I am actually amazed that the opposite of what is happening does not happen -- that more people aren't clamoring for this solution.
Six months ago I was testing some TCP application and by accident placed a sendto() in an infinite loop. The destination of the packets (on my LAN) locked up completely! And this was a powerful Pentium III with a 3c905 NIC. Not acceptable.
Robert Love
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |