Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!UNO.BITNET!POSTMASTER From: POSTMASTER@UNO.BITNET Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech Subject: MEMF_LOCKED (was: MEMF_PHYSICAL) Message-ID: <8905270509.AA18563@jade.berkeley.edu> Date: 26 May 89 07:17:00 GMT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Lines: 24 Deven Corzine writes in Message-ID: > Fine. But the RKM's say interrupt code and data MUST be in > MEMF_PUBLIC memory. Why? Interrupt code might be called up by any task in the system. Thus the Exec and the MMU will think that the code executed is part of the calling task. If that code and its data can are not accessible through the MMU by what the Exec thinks is the current task, you get a priviledge violation error. > And yes, virtual memory will have far less damaging effects > than memory protection, with the design of the operating system -- the > message passing mechanism, in particular. I believe I already demonstrated why the contrary is true. Valentin _________________________________________________________________________ "An operating system without Name: Valentin Pepelea virtual memory is an operating Phonet: (613) 231-7476 (New!) system without virtue." Bitnet: 451061@Uottawa.bitnet Usenet: Use cunyvm.cuny.edu gate - Ancient Inca Proverb Planet: 451061@acadvm1.UOttawa.CA