Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!walt.cc.utexas.edu!lshaw From: lshaw@walt.cc.utexas.edu (logan shaw) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech Subject: Re: Memory Protection! Message-ID: <35789@ut-emx.UUCP> Date: 12 Aug 90 05:06:44 GMT References: <1145.26bd4989@waikato.ac.nz> <13693@cbmvax.commodore.com> <13756@cbmvax.commodore.com> Sender: news@ut-emx.UUCP Reply-To: lshaw@walt.cc.utexas.edu (logan shaw) Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas Lines: 52 In article <13756@cbmvax.commodore.com> valentin@cbmvax (Valentin Pepelea) writes: >Providing new functions with added functionality cannot break any existing >programs. But embarking on such a venture requires energy, intitiative and >presence of clear mind which not everybody has. > >Another problem is that even if you provide the possiblity for new applications >to run protected within the environment, the fact that older programs cann still >jog around the address space and wreak havoc, defeats the initial purpose. But they can't wreak havoc with the memory declared as protected. Granted, it won't be 100% safe, but it will sure be alot better than it is right now. >Either you provide memory protection to everybody simultaneoulsy, or you >don't at all. I was under the impression that (motorola, at least) MMU's worked by setting certain memory pages with certain attributes (protected, etc), so the programs which asked for protected memory would be protected from everything, but older programs wouldn't be protected from newer programs. At any rate, all the newer programs (at least all the well written ones) would be asking for protected memory, so it eventually would be everywhere. Anyway, I don't see a disparity here, because I'm pretty sure that even in systems like UN*X, you can still request unprotected memory if you want it. So what's the problem? Isn't there enough space for things like this in a 512K rom? It can't be _that_ difficult to write. PLEASE can we have this in 2.1? Please, please, please? Pretty please with syntactic sugar on top of it? Just _once_ i'd like to see a requestor like this: /---------------------------------------\ | CLI Process 2 tried to hose Process 3 | | | | /--------\ /--------\ /-------\ | | | Freeze | | Ignore | | Reset | | | \--------/ \--------/ \-------/ | \---------------------------------------/ >Valentin >-- >The Goddess of democracy? "The tyrants Name: Valentin Pepelea >may distroy a statue, but they cannot Phone: (215) 431-9327 >kill a god." UseNet: cbmvax!valentin@uunet.uu.net > - Ancient Chinese Proverb Claimer: I not Commodore spokesman be ============================================================================ "The beauty queen, clevely clad, Logan Shaw admires herself in a cigarette ad. lshaw@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu Will she admit that all was in vain ======================== when the face in her mirror cracks like a windowpane?" -Elim Hall, _Things_Break_