[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120327153345.GA13948@localhost.localdomain>
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