"Juergen P. Meier" wrote: > > > http://rootshell.com/archive-j457nxiqi3gq59dv/199803/biffit.c > > > > 1. Linux 2.4.7 UP (pristine source, waiting for a new shiny Alan Cox patch) > > - system gets frozen after 3 seconds of flood on a gigabit link. > > Same result at a 100Mbps. The top utility shows (at least as long as it can) > > that system(kernel) gets 100% of the CPU in its march to death. Same for > > Linux kernel 2.2.19. > > 2.4.6 (modular, unpatched, selfcompiled) on an old P133: > > biffit against loopback: 99% cpu(system), no slowdown, system > responds normaly. (no slowdown) > biffit against eth0: same effect. (doh, cause linux sends it over loopback) Confirmed, with kernel 2.4.7 (unpatched, selfcompiled, modular). ~99% CPU usage, but no slowdown. Although the hardware is quite different -- proc: Thunderbird 1000 ram: 384 MB mobo: MSI MS6340 micro atx, VIA KT 133 NIC: LinkSys LNE100TX v4.1 (using kernel-distributed tulip driver, not that from Scyld) (eth0: ADMtek Comet rev 17) -- altho this is irrelevent isn't it. I've been using 2.4.whatever for only the past couple of weeks. Maybe I'm missing something. I don't run any UDP services whatsoever and would never run comsat under any circumstance. So, why does the sendto() in biffit.c not fail when sending to localhost? When I boot back to 2.2.19 and try the same thing, I get what I expect: Connection refused. Hrmm. Unless I missed something in the kernel docs regarding loopback behavior, the displayed 2.4.7 behavior seems like a Bad Thing. kw -- | Keith Warno cell: +1 609-209-5800 | http://www.valaran.com/ work: +1 609-716-7200 x243 | Valaran Corporation Penguin Guy SMS : kw-mobileat_private +--------------------------------------------------------------//
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jul 27 2001 - 19:45:04 PDT