Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!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: <423@mohawk.cs.utexas.edu>
Date: 13 Nov 89 06:05:32 GMT
References: <410@mohawk.cs.utexas.edu> <807@trlluna.trl.oz>
Reply-To: bryan@cs.utexas.edu
Organization: Spam Detection & Removal Squad, Austin, TX
Lines: 14
Spam-Content: Negligible

In article <807@trlluna.trl.oz> aduncan@rhea.trl.oz.au (Allan Duncan) writes:
=-From article <410@mohawk.cs.utexas.edu>, by bryan@cs.utexas.edu (Bryan Bayerdorffer @ Wit's End):
=-
=->  And how do you propose to do message 
=-> passing in the presence of memory protection, hmm?  Either the kernel copies 
=-> messages between address spaces, or you have to have shared segments that can 
=-> be read-only for arbitrary groups of processes.  Either way, it's a performance 
=-> hit.
=-
=-What is MEMF_PUBLIC for then?
=-

	For being writeable by everyone, so that your buggy program can still
interfere with other tasks.