From owner-freebsd-current Fri Apr 12 13:02:29 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id NAA07478 for current-outgoing; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 13:02:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xi.dorm.umd.edu (root@xi.dorm.umd.edu [129.2.152.45]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA07461 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 13:02:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (smpatel@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xi.dorm.umd.edu (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA06571; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 15:57:23 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 15:57:22 -0400 (EDT) From: Sujal Patel X-Sender: smpatel@xi.dorm.umd.edu To: Poul-Henning Kamp cc: Paul Traina , current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: log_in_vain stuff In-Reply-To: <14797.829324640@critter.tfs.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Fri, 12 Apr 1996, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > That sounds way too complicated. I think you should just leave them off, > > turn them on for debugging, and if you want them on, they do need internal > > rate limiting in the kernel (a simple check should be sufficient). > > We have something very similar a couple of other places, stray ints for > instance... Yes but since stray interrupts cause the exact same log message, syslog will compact that down to: /kernel: stray irq 7 last message repeated 7199 times Besides, there really isn't a way for a remote attacker to cause a stray irq. Sujal