> I don't understand what is so difficult about simply rate-limiting > the code at the proper point -- at the very beginning of the > call that the interrupt harvester makes, removing most of the fixed > overhead for the case where a system is getting a large number of > interrupts per second? Why are you going through loops to create > complex, sensitive code paths when a simple solution can be plopped > down and will work, SNAP, just like that? Because I need to make folks other than you happy. Lots of security minded people what _all_ the interrupt entropy they can get, and this method gives them that while allowing others to throttle the harvester back. M -- Mark Murray Warning: this .sig is umop ap!sdn To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
- Re: Ethernet entropy harvesting seriously pes... Bruce Evans
- Re: Ethernet entropy harvesting seriously... Mark Murray
- Re: Ethernet entropy harvesting serio... Matt Dillon
- Re: Ethernet entropy harvesting ... Mark Murray
- Re: Ethernet entropy harvest... Matt Dillon
- Re: Ethernet entropy harvest... Mark Murray
- Re: Ethernet entropy harvest... Matt Dillon
- promiscuous mode Ronan Lucio
- Re: promiscuous mode Thomas T. Veldhouse
- Re: promiscuous mode Ronan Lucio
- Re: Ethernet entropy harvest... Mark Murray
- Re: Ethernet entropy harvest... Matt Dillon
- Re: Ethernet entropy harvest... Matthew N. Dodd
- Re: Ethernet entropy harvest... Matthew Jacob
- Re: Ethernet entropy harvest... Paul Richards
- Re: Ethernet entropy harvest... Maxim Sobolev
- Re: Ethernet entropy harvesting serio... Matt Dillon
- Re: RE: Ethernet entropy harvesting seriously pessimiz... Matt Dillon