On Mon, 2005-10-31 at 01:05 +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > At Fri, 28 Oct 2005 20:34:09 +0200, > Bernhard Kauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Now to copy(): I know no functional argument to introduce a copy() into > > L4.sec. The only argument is performance. Because mapping (or copy) a > > return endpoint with every RPC will be too expensive, > > Ask Espen about "map-once" mappings to learn how to allow to optimize > reply capabilities.
No no. Map once mappings are another thing entirely. They decidedly do NOT provide any optimization of reply capabilities. What they *do* accomplish is to utterly break the notion of capability transfer in the same way that the mach reply port does. shap _______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
