On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 14:19:31 +0200 Norman Feske (NF) wrote: NF> > So you'd need something like a "directed revoke" feature. We had NF> > something like that in Fiasco-V2, where you could do an "unmap NF> > without self" and additionally specify a task number. Only child NF> > mappings for that task and its children would be removed. In the NF> > NOVA case, you'd specify a PD capability instead of a task number. NF> NF> that's what I'm after.
There are some subtle corner cases possible if revoke gets preempted. One is that if you do a revoke (range, PD-cap), the range obviously cannot go away, but the PD-cap can. This means if you do a directed revoke by specifying a PD-cap, and the PD-cap (or the PD) goes away in the middle of a preempted revoke, the remainder of the revoke would fail to look up the PD and do a full revoke of the range instead. Alternatively you'd have to hold onto the PD-cap while a revoke with that PD-cap is ongoing, which is hardly any better. Cheers, Udo
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________ Genode-main mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/genode-main
