At Wed, 19 Oct 2005 11:33:49 +0800, yuan Darwin-r62832 wrote:
Physical memory management needn't be an all or nothing deal. Certainly, an application might wish to completely manage the paging policy and its address space layout, however, I tend to think that this is the exception. And as we will provide a POSIX personality, we need to have some sort of default VM manager.
About general VM manager, what I really mean is just the "default VM manager". However, the question is still there: now that those sort of default VM managers provide mmap to those applications who don't want to manage their phsical memory, should they trust these VM managers?
As I tried to explain in my last email, there is no default VM *server*. There is a default VM *library*.
My conclusion is, if Sawmill's framework has security problem on trust model, so has Hurd.
I don't see how this logically follows.
Thanks, Neal