Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!jsq
From: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F Haugh II)
Newsgroups: comp.std.unix
Subject: Re: qfork()
Message-ID: <16474@cs.utexas.edu>
Date: 2 Jan 91 13:17:31 GMT
References: <16066@cs.utexas.edu> <16271@cs.utexas.edu> <16307@cs.utexas.edu> <16370@cs.utexas.edu>
Sender: jsq@cs.utexas.edu
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F Haugh II)
Organization: Lone Star Cafe and BBS Service
Lines: 21
Approved: jsq@cs.utexas.edu (Moderator, John S. Quarterman)
X-Submissions: std-unix@uunet.uu.net

Submitted-by: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F Haugh II)

In article <16370@cs.utexas.edu> mason@tmsoft.uucp (Dave Mason) writes:
>The real requirement is presumably: ``Must not execute any code that
>changes MEMORY.'' As both the parent and child have their own register
>sets.  Now, expressing that in a high-level way that is portable may
>be quite a trick.  (Think of SPARC vs. 386 vs. HP/3000!)

Yes, that is the essence of the problem - there are CPUs out there
which have a very small number of CPU registers (perhaps only two
or three) available to the user.  As I recall, the TI 9900 has one
register which points to a location in memory where the rest of the
"registers" exist, and of course older HP CPU's have their own ideas
about where data is stored.
-- 
John F. Haugh II                             UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh
Ma Bell: (512) 832-8832                           Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org
"While you are here, your wives and girlfriends are dating handsome American
 movie and TV stars. Stars like Tom Selleck, Bruce Willis, and Bart Simpson."

Volume-Number: Volume 22, Number 53