-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Am Fre, 03 Mär 2000 schrieben Sie:
"CS" == Christian Stueble <stueble@amaunet.cs.uni-dortmund.de> writes:
CS> what happens if IPC uses an invalid thread-id? Is the message although CS> forwarded to the subsystem's chief?
On MIPS the IPC will fail with "invalid destination". According to my reading of the manual, that is the expected behaviour. Delivery to a chief doesn't make sense, as the "nearest chief" is undefined for a non-existing thread. Yes, "nearest chief" of the receiver doesn't make sense, but "nearest chief" of the sender does. Does Fiasco behave the same?
The advantage would be that a chief can provide only locally valid thread-ids to its clan and translate them internally into valid thread-ids. To emulate this behaviour currently I have to create a dummy task to prevent invalid thread-ids. Chris -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Christian Stueble............stueble@ls6.cs.uni-dortmund.de PubKey[BF7104F5].......fp=8678C5D3CAD9CD8C F1DDB8EC202F116A To be or not to be is true... (apocrypha of George Boole) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use MessageID: vZbij/yMwxhwHaw1rv5qvQ1hCncfQz5j iQCVAwUAOL/pNPyJjJy/cQT1AQHMiQP/e+Xs41jBkNggC7Gg+1AqGtbT/m4uBdCz saH+FBVe5xlHNGOVS/cLjjRwnxrnnPxeZ2lIVSi4XsS5ZAGuXLjU31euECv27lPF xH5TptCPD6LVswAdSQGiiIzsSKrSiC93wzxG8CgHj3sHefdjMatA+W8NZJP5Q2uk 9SZjiOQZRc4= =/BJR -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----