Hi, Samuel Thibault wrote: >> When process-shared semaphores and mutexes themselves are in the shared >> memory, can we not use the similar implementation as the ones in the same >> process? > > The implementation uses Mach messages, so it's basically the same thing. > With different tasks, you need to add the task name along the port name. > And you need that to be done securely, including for a semaphore between > a root process and a user process. In a process of a single user, much > less issues happen. I didn't realize there is a security issue. Then must process-shared semaphores and mutexes be implemented in shared memory? or it's completely through IPCs?
Zheng Da
