[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Niels Möller) writes: > > However, I'm not sure if L4-Hurd needs a central port right server. Is > > it really necessary? > > My reasoning, in > > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 16 Nov 2001 15:54:28 +0100) > > was that an extra level of indirection is necessary for implementing a > reliable no-senders notification. I'd be delighted to be proved wrong.
If I understand your "reasoning" right you need the extra level of indirection to implement a reliable "no sender notification" for the case, that - a task does suicide - a task dies violently (with this I assume you mean it raises an exception and is killed by the micro kernel). As Volkmar already pointed out it is impossible for a task to do suicide since only the task server is allowed to create and delete tasks. And a task can not die violently since if it raises an exception this exception is delivered to an exception handler thread which can handle this situation. So it should be possible to inform all interested servers about the death of a task and therefore all server could clean up their resources if the dying task was the last user. Did I miss anything? Jean _______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
