[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Comments on the hurd-on-l4 document
From: |
Yoshinori K. Okuji |
Subject: |
Re: Comments on the hurd-on-l4 document |
Date: |
Thu, 9 Jun 2005 00:00:32 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.7.2 |
On Wednesday 08 June 2005 22:38, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> BTW, I didn't think much about POSIX signals. I think that signals
> will still be done by sending messages directly to the tasks message
> port, not via notifications.
I don't see why you distinguish POSIX signals from notifications. For example,
select() can be implemented on the top of POSIX realtime signals. This
suggests that there is no fundamental difference between them (at least
between some of POSIX signals and notifications).
Another example is SIGWINCH. To be able to obtain SIGWINCH, a task which wants
to receive this signal shall negotiate with a terminal task, giving a
capability to this terminal task. For me, this looks identical to the
notification system you describe.
Okuji
Re: Comments on the hurd-on-l4 document, Marcus Brinkmann, 2005/06/08