From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: dean-list-linux-kernel@arctic.org (dean gaudet)
Cc: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (Alan Cox),
torvalds@transmeta.com (Linus Torvalds),
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: Negative scalability by removal of
Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2000 22:43:46 +0000 (GMT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <E13sYVx-0005fB-00@the-village.bc.nu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0011051219030.22526-100000@twinlark.arctic.org> from "dean gaudet" at Nov 05, 2000 12:21:54 PM
> oh, someone reminded me of the other reason sysvsems suck: a cgi can grab
> the semaphore and hold it, causing a DoS. of course folks could, and
> should use suexec/cgiwrap to avoid this.
The same cgi can killall -STOP httpd
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2000-11-05 22:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200010261405.XAA19135@asami.proc.flab.fujitsu.co.jp>
[not found] ` <200010250736.QAA12373@asami.proc.flab.fujitsu.co.jp>
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.21.0010251242050.943-100000@duckman.distro.conectiva>
[not found] ` <200010260138.KAA17028@asami.proc.flab.fujitsu.co.jp>
2000-10-27 6:24 ` Negative scalability by removal of lock_kernel()? (Was: Strange performance behavior of 2.4.0-test9) kumon
2000-10-27 6:32 ` Negative scalability by removal of lock_kernel()?(Was: " Jeff V. Merkey
2000-10-27 7:13 ` Alexander Viro
2000-10-27 7:46 ` Andi Kleen
2000-10-27 10:23 ` Andrew Morton
2000-10-27 10:25 ` Andi Kleen
2000-10-27 12:57 ` [PATCH] " kumon
2000-10-28 15:46 ` Andrew Morton
2000-10-28 15:58 ` Andi Kleen
2000-10-28 16:05 ` Jeff Garzik
2000-10-28 16:20 ` [PATCH] Re: Negative scalability by removal of lock_kernel()?(Was: Alan Cox
2000-10-29 19:45 ` dean gaudet
2000-10-30 6:29 ` Andi Kleen
2000-10-30 15:28 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2000-10-30 16:36 ` Rik van Riel
2000-10-30 18:02 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2000-10-28 16:46 ` [PATCH] Re: Negative scalability by removal of lock_kernel()?(Was: Strange performance behavior of 2.4.0-test9) Andrew Morton
2000-10-30 9:27 ` kumon
2000-10-30 15:00 ` Andrew Morton
2000-10-30 23:24 ` dean gaudet
2000-11-04 5:08 ` [PATCH] Re: Negative scalability by removal of lock_kernel()?(Was:Strange " Andrew Morton
2000-11-04 6:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2000-11-04 10:54 ` [PATCH] Re: Negative scalability by removal of Alan Cox
2000-11-04 17:22 ` Linus Torvalds
2000-11-05 16:22 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2000-11-05 20:21 ` dean gaudet
2000-11-05 22:43 ` Alan Cox [this message]
2000-11-04 20:03 ` [PATCH] Re: Negative scalability by removal of lock_kernel()?(Was:Strange performance behavior of 2.4.0-test9) dean gaudet
2000-11-04 20:42 ` [PATCH] Re: Negative scalability by removal of lock_kernel()?(Was:Strange Alan Cox
2000-11-04 20:11 ` [PATCH] Re: Negative scalability by removal of lock_kernel()?(Was:Strange performance behavior of 2.4.0-test9) dean gaudet
2000-11-04 20:43 ` [PATCH] Re: Negative scalability by removal of lock_kernel()?(Was:Strange Alan Cox
2000-11-05 4:52 ` dean gaudet
2000-10-31 15:36 ` [PATCH] Re: Negative scalability by removal of lock_kernel()?(Was: Strange performance behavior of 2.4.0-test9) Andrew Morton
2000-11-02 12:50 ` kumon
2000-11-01 1:02 ` kumon
2000-11-02 11:09 ` kumon
2000-11-04 5:07 ` Andrew Morton
2000-10-27 8:17 ` Jeff V. Merkey
2000-11-04 5:55 ` Preemptive scheduling of woken-up processes kumon
2000-10-27 10:11 ` Negative scalability by removal of lock_kernel()?(Was: Strange performance behavior of 2.4.0-test9) kumon
[not found] <3A06C007.99EE3746@uow.edu.au>
2000-11-06 17:17 ` [PATCH] Re: Negative scalability by removal of Alan Cox
2000-11-06 17:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2000-11-07 5:23 ` dean gaudet
2000-11-07 5:14 ` David S. Miller
2000-11-07 9:27 ` dean gaudet
2000-11-07 12:54 ` Andrew Morton
2000-11-07 13:52 ` Alan Cox
2000-11-21 2:06 ` lamont
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=E13sYVx-0005fB-00@the-village.bc.nu \
--to=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=dean-list-linux-kernel@arctic.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®