Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!ames!haven!udel!new
From: new@udel.edu (Darren New)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: resource tracking
Message-ID: <11912@nigel.udel.EDU>
Date: 22 Feb 90 23:55:15 GMT
References: <355.25C92297@weyr.FIDONET.ORG> <926@tardis.Tymnet.COM> <352@amgraf.UUCP> <5156@sugar.hackercorp.com> <5159@sugar.hackercorp.com> <9704@cbmvax.commodore.com> <5178@sugar.hackercorp.com> <22955@usc.edu> <5185@sugar.hackercorp.com> <22973@usc.edu> <5191 <21
Sender: usenet@udel.EDU
Reply-To: new@udel.edu (Darren New)
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Delaware
Lines: 11

In article <21183@watdragon.waterloo.edu> himacdonald@watdragon.waterloo.edu (Hamish Macdonald) writes:
>Question: Does I/O to Exec devices HAVE to involve message passing?
>Nowhere do
>I see a 'serial.device' task (or anything remotely interpretable as
>such) running.  

Well, when I use XOper to look at the ports list, I see a serial.device
message port generating a software interrupt into a serial.device task.
It seems to me that if you can do asynchronous calls (like post a read
and then write or wait for a timeout or ...) then you must be using 
messages. -- Darren