Re: 64bit GNU Mach

[Arne Babenhauserheide]

Is there any update on 64bit GNU Mach?

Can it already be tested by nerd-god users who refuse to write patches?

(working on the qoth)

Best wishes,
Arne

Am Montag, 2. April 2012, 15:44:20 schrieb Richard Braun:
> On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 03:21:06PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Because there is code in GNU Mach that uses mach_port_t as a pointer,
> > see e.g. kdportdeath(), which just casts mach_port_t into ipc_port_t, or
> > ipc_kmsg_copyin_header which casts back the just-resolved object into
> > mach_port_t. Such code might have to simply use the ipc_port_t type
> > instead, I don't know. What I know for sure, however, is that xnu does
> > typedef ipc_port_t mach_port_t, which makes me tend to think that in the
> > kernel, mach_port_t is supposed to be a pointer, while mach_port_name_t
> > is for the port names.
>
> Keeping names-to-pointer casts wouldn't be the cleanest way, but it
> may save some effort. Using ipc_port_t seems better to me, but as it's
> completely internal to the kernel, it doesn't matter much. To answer
> your inital question, yes, it doesn't hurt much and makes sense to use
> a 32-bit type for port names, whatever the word size.
--
1w6 sie zu achten,
sie alle zu finden,
in Spiele zu leiten
und sacht zu verbinden.
→ http://1w6.org

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.