Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!iuvax!cica!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!bryan
From: bryan@cs.utexas.edu (Bryan Bayerdorffer @ Wit's End)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Memory Protection
Message-ID: <419@mohawk.cs.utexas.edu>
Date: 7 Nov 89 04:04:49 GMT
References: <37410@srcsip.UUCP> <8911040008.AA13445@en.ecn.purdue.edu> <1989Nov4.031121.5495@welch.jhu.edu> <410@mohawk.cs.utexas.edu> <8638@microsoft.UUCP>
Reply-To: bryan@cs.utexas.edu
Organization: Spam Detection & Removal Squad, Austin, TX
Lines: 23
Spam-Content: Negligible

In article <8638@microsoft.UUCP> w-edwinh@microsoft.UUCP (Edwin Hoogerbeets) writes:
=-In article <410@mohawk.cs.utexas.edu> bryan@cs.utexas.edu writes:
=->	Resource tracking and memory protection aren't free.  Part of the
=-
=-Resource tracking: I'd like to see ARP do more than just memory. How
=-
=-I really like the idea someone mentioned a while back of an
=-ExitHandler() routine. When a task starts up, you set a field of the
=-
	These are noble ideas, but only help significantly if everyone uses
them.  It does little good to have resource tracking for only 10% of your
tasks.  Plus, your exit routines could have bugs, or your buggy tasks could
stomp them.  This kind of code belongs in the kernel, not in user tasks.  I'm
afraid that this idea, if implemented, would go the way of Commodities Exchange
(remember?) --- it's the way things should be done, but no one will do it,
because it wasn't required from the start.

=-
=-Message passing: I believe the MEMF_PUBLIC flag to AllocMem() was 
=-Commodore's thinking ahead to an OS with protected memory. Message passing 
=-could be done the same way it is now, but all messages would have to be 
=-allocated as public, for everyone to read. 
=-				       ^^^^--and write.  So much for protection.