Re: emulating no-senders notifications in L4?

[Thomas Bushnell, BSG]

address@hidden (Niels Möller) writes:

> This sounds a lot like having a mach-port-server that handles all ipc.
> Is that the way to go? How efficiently can the extra redirection be
> handled in L4?
> 
> If we go in this direction, there's no real use of any L4-security;
> the only mechanism that would be obviously useful is a flag "accept
> rpc only from this specific task", that every task but the
> task-server/mach-port-server could use.

The problem with this is that it voids the point of L4.  I mean, so
what if messages can be sent 4 times faster if it takes six messages
to actually do an RPC?

If the L4 people can't figure out a way to provide some kind of basic
implementation for this in the kernel, then they simply should stop
claiming to be so fast since they are just forcing the complexity and
slowdown into another place.