Re: [MiNT] Memory protection

[Konrad Kokoszkiewicz <draco@mi.com.pl>]

Hi,

> First, a quick confirmation, just to make sure my brain is in gear:
> 
> Mint only uses the MMU on the 030, correct?  I'm saying this because
> of the "#ifndef" in getmch() and the Makefile "-DCPU_TEST".

Yes, MiNTs MMU code works only on a 68030.

And: -DCPU_TEST has nothing to do with the MMU code. If you #ifdef out
the CPU_TEST, the end result will be exactly the same with except, that
the CPU information will be fetched from the TOS Cookie Jar instead of
own hardware test.

Actually removing -DCPU_TEST (and -DFPU_TEST too) would do deactivate the
own hardware tests, but I wouldn't vote for that, because I wrote them :))
 
> Second, anyone adverse to having three levels of memory protection?
> 1) (current) None - current "mintnp.prg".
> 2) (new) Pagination - Uses unprotected pages.  Prevents memory leaks
>             by using pages, but provides no memory protection on those pages.
>             This would be supported on 020s - 060s.
> 3)  (current) Full protection, as is today.  With expansion into the 040
>     and 060s (someone'll have to test the 060 stuff, at least until
>     I get one :).
> 
> Note that #2 & #3 could be set up on a per process level.  And, of course,
> going back to #1 would require a re-boot.

I think it sounds good. No? :)

--
Konrad M.Kokoszkiewicz
|mail: draco@mi.com.pl                  | Atari Falcon030/TT030/65XE |
|http://www.obta.uw.edu.pl/~draco/
|http://draco.atari.org

** Ea natura multitudinis est,
** aut servit humiliter, aut superbe dominatur (Liv. XXIV,25)
*************************************************************
** U pospolstwa normalne jest, ze albo sluzy ono unizenie,
** albo bezczelnie sie panoszy.