lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 17:33:45 +0200 From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com> To: chetan loke <loke.chetan@...il.com> Cc: "Keller, Jacob E" <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net" <e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>, "Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>, "Ronciak, John" <john.ronciak@...el.com>, "john.stultz@...aro.org" <john.stultz@...aro.org>, "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH net V4 2/2] igb: offer a PTP Hardware Clock instead of the timecompare method On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 01:11:32PM -0400, chetan loke wrote: > > Why isn't ioctl-rate limiting acceptable? Let me turn the question around. What other kernel subsystem rate limits ioctls? Richard -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists