Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I remember reading about this in the TODO list etc. Are there any concrete > other unrobustnesses you remember?
There are a jillion. The filesystem basically assumes that it's talking to the kernel. If it's not, then the user could be bollixing things up horribly in various ways; since the pager is essentially shared by all users, it can affect others too. One example would be to fail to properly respond to sync and flush requests. > BTW, I did not consider the return value too much, but just assumed that > returning the same as before would be fine. I now verified that the return > value is ignored in mach_msg_server (in glibc), and that current practice > seems to be that the demux function returns 0 if it could not process the > message and 1 if it could and did. As we are not processing the message, > but just synchronise our state, I don't see a problem (even semantically). Yes, that's right. _______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
