Re: capability interface for idl4

[Simon Nieuviarts]

Le Jeudi 6 Octobre 2005 18:21, Bas Wijnen a écrit :
> On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 02:40:13PM +0200, Ludovic Court?s wrote:
> > Hi Neal,
> >
> > "Neal H. Walfield" <address@hidden> writes:
> > > This is one of the reasons why the kernel needs to provide some form
> > > of support for capabilities.
> >
> > That's an opportunity to resurrect an old thread...  ;-)
> >
> > What do you think of Amoeba's relatively simple approach?
> > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/l4-hurd/2005-08/msg00014.html
>
> I think anything protected by sparsity is fundamentally flawed and
> unacceptable, especially for something as critical as the kernel.
>
> Of course I'm not the one whose acceptance it needs, though. ;-)

Hi,

I don't know the typical probability of a logical gate to erroneously flipping 
a bit. But I consider that if the the probability of such an hardware error 
is higher than the probability of a false sparsity match, then relying on 
this sparsity may be a right choice.
Anyway, not relying on sparsity at all (if possible) is still a better design. 
I'm not yet familiar enough with capabilities to know if it is possible.

Simon.