Local IPC (was Re: Comparing "copy" and "map/unmap")

[Espen Skoglund]

[Jonathan S Shapiro]
>>> Local IPC was a bad idea, and is going away. It cannot be
>>> implemented cleanly in a protected system in any case.
>> 
>> Why that?  If the protected objects are stored on kernel immutable
>> memory, how could a thread modify it?  Or is the problem something
>> completly different?

> The problem is that the semantics of local IPC was wrong, and it
> wasn't wrong in a fixable way.

What have you been smoking this morning that makes you throw out
claims like this?  This is news to me.  Please elaborate.  And who's
decided that it's going away?  You?

        eSk