[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: A comment about changing kernels

From: Marcus Brinkmann
Subject: Re: A comment about changing kernels
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 16:45:16 +0100
User-agent: Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.7 (Sanjō) APEL/10.6 Emacs/21.4 (i386-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI)

At Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:53:43 -0500,
"Jonathan S. Shapiro" <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-11-01 at 01:22 +0100, Bernhard Kauer wrote:
> > > we may safely conclude that these CALL/RETURN patterns
> > > describe the overwhelming majority of IPCs -- all of the other patterns
> > > taken together accounted in EROS for less than 1% of all dynamic IPCs.
> > 
> > Is the CALL/RETURN pattern used for capability delegation (giving an cap
> > to another party) or only for usage of these capabilities?
> For delegation, we tend to see a CALL/RETURN pair in which one of the
> arguments to the CALL is the capability being delegated.
> However, these delegations are dynamically very rare in comparison to
> *uses* of capabilities. As an imperfect intuition: delegation tends to
> occur during program setup, but rarely during program steady-state
> execution. A delegation:use ratio of 1:100 or even 1:1000 would not be
> an unreasonable expectation.

Does this include capabilities returned in the return of the call?
Like, for example in dir_open?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]