> PF_RING seems to be used for the newest version of ntop for faster packet > capture and analysis. Is that what you are trying to accomplish? Yes. this is the reason why we turn back on PF_RING to patch the kernel. Generally, the libpcap can not meet our need to capture the network packets. > Or did I just get a bad google? > Sorry, what do you mean? _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: Re: PF_RING crashed the CentOS5 - BUG: soft lockup - CPU#7
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Re: PF_RING crashed the CentOS5 - BUG: soft lockup - CPU#7
- From: "Ian jonhson" <jonhson.ian@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 00:33:22 +0800
- Delivered-to: centos@xxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <g6l3cn$bj0$2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- References: <8f34198c0807272219r3fe5e761rbb2e6d576f633156@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <g6l3cn$bj0$2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- References:
- PF_RING crashed the CentOS5 - BUG: soft lockup - CPU#7
- From: Ian jonhson
- Re: PF_RING crashed the CentOS5 - BUG: soft lockup - CPU#7
- From: Scott Silva
- PF_RING crashed the CentOS5 - BUG: soft lockup - CPU#7
- Prev by Date: Re: Change Web Server to another disk in Centos 5.2
- Next by Date: Re: Change Web Server to another disk in Centos 5.2
- Previous by thread: Re: PF_RING crashed the CentOS5 - BUG: soft lockup - CPU#7
- Next by thread: Re: [Ntop-misc] PF_RING crashed the CentOS5 - BUG: soft lockup - CPU#7
- Index(es):
 |