Re: [Hardeneddrivers-discuss] RE: Some Initial Comments on DDH-Spec-0.5h.pdf
Pavel Machek <[email protected]> Mon, 30 Sep 2002 06:40:40 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.kernel.carrier-grade,gmane.linux.kernel.hardened-drivers,gmane.linux.kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi! > > Most of what makes a 'good' driver is common for all purposes - things you > > mention like don't make the system hang, don't cause fatal exceptions. But > > there are some things that would be different between a desktop, embedded > > system, enterprise server, or carrier server. For instance, when there is a > > tradeoff between reliability and performance; when reliability is king, it > > might be wise to do an insane amount of parameter checking to offset the > > merest chance of an undetected bug crashing a system. > > This is not a valid example. We do not make tradeoffs between > performance and reliability. Reliability _always_ comes first. If it > did not, it's a bug. No. We do run all drivers in *one* addressspace. That's bad for reliability. -- Philips Velo 1: 1"x4"x8", 300gram, 60, 12MB, 40bogomips, linux, mutt, details at http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/velo/index.html.