[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: proxy memory objects
From: |
Roland McGrath |
Subject: |
Re: proxy memory objects |
Date: |
Wed, 20 Nov 2002 21:10:49 -0500 (EST) |
> So is it correct to just mask off the unallowed protection bit and grant the
> mapping silently, making it fail if the actual permissions the server gave
> in the proxy memory object are violated? Or should vm_map already do some
> initial permission check and return an error?
I don't think vm_map should return an error. There might be practical
reasons for this, but my rationale is simply that the behavior ought to
mimic what a real memory object would do. i.e., we want io_map to return a
memory object and the user doesn't know whether the server used the proxy
object facility or just returned a port of his own.
- proxy memory objects, Marcus Brinkmann, 2002/11/19
- Re: proxy memory objects, Marcus Brinkmann, 2002/11/19
- Re: proxy memory objects, Thomas Bushnell, BSG, 2002/11/21
- Re: proxy memory objects, Marcus Brinkmann, 2002/11/21
- Re: proxy memory objects, Thomas Bushnell, BSG, 2002/11/21
- Re: proxy memory objects, Marcus Brinkmann, 2002/11/21
- Re: proxy memory objects, Thomas Bushnell, BSG, 2002/11/21
- Re: proxy memory objects, Marcus Brinkmann, 2002/11/22
- Re: proxy memory objects, Thomas Bushnell, BSG, 2002/11/22
Re: proxy memory objects, Marcus Brinkmann, 2002/11/20
- Re: proxy memory objects,
Roland McGrath <=