>
> though: is APIC still at that address?
>
I don't know, but we can search the current address reading from ACPI
tables, so It's not problem.
Another question: I found a project called OSKit, what feels to be Mach 2.x
branch.
What is the difference about gnumach and oskit?
In their repository
Hello,
Almudena Garcia, le dim. 03 févr. 2019 19:45:21 +0100, a ecrit:
> At first time, I found that Mach 4 also had a implementation of cpu_number()
> (in kernel/imps/cpu_number.h), with this:
>
> static inline int
> cpu_number()
> {
> return apic_local_unit.unit_id.r >> 24;
> }
>
> Later,
Hi all:
I'm researching about SMP support in Mach microkernel, reading code and
reviewing old messages in maillist.
Mach 4 code can be downloaded from here:
ftp://ftp.lip6.fr/pub/mach/mach4/mach/
And, exploring old code, I'm find some interesting things:
At first time, I found that Mach 4 also
Hello,
Svante Signell, le dim. 03 févr. 2019 13:31:11 +0100, a ecrit:
> GNU/Linux and GNU/Hurd: (all OK)
> Terminal 1 and Terminal 2:
> ./test-flock foo r x
> ./test-flock foo w x
> ./test-flock foo r xn
> ./test-flock foo w xn
Ok. One remaining question is whether we want to let flock work even
On Sat, 2019-02-02 at 14:34 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Hello,
> So can you confirm my guesswork above? If, so, then only keep the first
> line (the second line doesn't make sense in my guesswork), and mention
> that while fcntl requires WR access for exclusive lock, flock doesn't.
I've now r
