Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!cornell!rochester!udel!mmdf
From: Leisner.Henr@xerox.com (Marty)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: can mm/fs fork/exec?
Message-ID: <1903@louie.udel.EDU>
Date: 6 Apr 88 00:33:05 GMT
Sender: mmdf@udel.EDU
Lines: 26


I've been rewriting some of the system task to use callgates on a x286 instead
of passing messages (since calls like sys_xit, sys_exec, sys_fork only are
invoked by mm, there is no need to use the messages as a synchronization
mechanism).

I've noticed the E_BAD_PROC  check is generally of the nature:
if (who < 0 || who >= NR_PROCS) 
		result = E_BAD_PROC;


Seems like 0 should be LOW_USER_NUMBER unless MM and FS are really allowed to do
them.

On this note, why not allow MM and FS to fork/exec?  If the memory maps are
recorded in a place where MM can get at them, wouldn't it be reasonable to run
init off the root file system as opposed to including it with the boot disk
image?  I always found the including of init in the boot image kinda kludgey.


marty
ARPA:	leisner.henr@xerox.com
GV:  leisner.henr
NS:  martin leisner:henr801c:xerox
UUCP:	nsc!nscimg!amps!marty