[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: kernel command line

From: Thomas Bushnell, BSG
Subject: Re: kernel command line
Date: 15 May 2001 15:01:58 -0700
User-agent: Gnus/5.0803 (Gnus v5.8.3) Emacs/20.7

Marcus Brinkmann <Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de> writes:

> Yes, this would work out the way you described it.  How about Mach keeping
> track of the task hierarchy?  I am not sure how exactly this would need to
> be implemented.  Mach could keep a pointer to the parent task in the task
> structure.  Someone having the host control port (?) could extract a send
> right to this parent task port. Proc can match this (? does proc keep a
> send right to every task? Have to check.).

My idea is that a suitably privileged task could, given a port for
task T, get a port for its parent.  If the parent is dead, it gets

> However, I am not sure what happens if the parent task dies.
> If proc keeps a send right, it will become a dead name.  Then we just have
> to make sure that we will return the same dead name on request.

There is no such thing as "the same dead name".

reply via email to

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