Andrew’s use case makes sense to me at first glance. 

I think IRQ caps are special in a way here, as there is a difference to other 
derived caps: A cap for a single IRQ is logically a top-level cap, similar to a 
frame cap. This present model basically means that you can’t delegate them, 
unlike other objects. Seems like a weakness (if not conceptual inconsistency) 
in our present model. 

As Gerwin indicates, just moving to two levels is not necessarily a good 
solution. I tend to think that the only valid magic numbers are zero, one, and 
infinity ;-)

Gernot

> On 16 Feb 2017, at 10:31, [email protected] wrote:
> 
> Currently, this is mostly implementation driven - there is one bit reserved 
> for the derivation level in the data structure that tracks it. It’s possible 
> that IRQControl caps specifically have some space left that could be used for 
> more levels, but it would make them a special case.
> 
> If we reserved 2 bits for the level, you’d hit the same problem somewhat 
> later, though, and the argument at the time was that (very small) finiteness 
> of derivation levels of these control caps has to be solved at user level 
> anyway and it’s better to make you think of it immediately rather than when 
> you’ve designed yourself into a corner.
> 
> Maybe you do have a very good use case here, though, and we should rethink 
> that argument (as we did for endpoint caps - their level of specialness is 
> pretty messy, but we considered it worth the pain). I should probably leave 
> that part to Kevin.
> 
> Cheers,
> Gerwin
> 
>> On 16.02.2017, at 03:20, Andrew Gacek <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> Based on the seL4 manual it sounds like IRQControl caps only support
>> one level of derivation. What is the reason for this restriction? We
>> encountered a case where we wanted to hand out an IRQControl for a
>> specific irq and then later revoke access, but we couldn't do it
>> because the IRQControl for a specific irq is already a derived
>> capability.
>> 
>> -Andrew
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Devel mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://sel4.systems/lists/listinfo/devel
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://sel4.systems/lists/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://sel4.systems/lists/listinfo/devel

Reply via email to