netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5

To: Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5
From: Robert Love <rml@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: 04 Oct 2001 19:47:10 -0400
Cc: Alex Bligh - linux-kernel <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxx>, mingo@xxxxxxx, jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Simon Kirby <sim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20011004192645.A20389@redhat.com>
References: <20011004174945.B18528@redhat.com> <309455016.1002241234@[195.224.237.69]> <20011004192645.A20389@redhat.com>
Sender: owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
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


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>