Joshua Branson, le sam. 10 nov. 2018 10:32:15 -0500, a ecrit: > Samuel Thibault <samuel.thiba...@gnu.org> writes: > > > Joshua Branson, le ven. 09 nov. 2018 11:59:31 -0500, a ecrit: > >> > It's correct, but could be improved: I'd say rather take the example of > >> > glibc's send(), which is an RPC handled by pfinet, which uses a > >> > device_write RPC to actually emit an Ethernet frame, which is handled by > >> > netdde, which pushes the hardware, and gets an interrupt from GNU Mach > >> > when that's done. > >> > >> I think the new attached patch shows that, but I'm not an expert. > > > > It's more interesting, yet not as good as it could :) > > Thanks for the awesome info! I went ahead and make an inkscape image.
The arrows are correct, but the framing is misleading. I believe you really need to have proper frame conventions for processes boundaries and for components: applications run along glibc within the same process, and hurd translators run as different processes. If that's not represented it will be misleading. Samuel
