lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Oct]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5
From
Date
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:04    [W:0.119 / U:7.504 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site