Re: [MiNT] kernel 1.15.10b fragmentation

[Frank Naumann <fnaumann@mail.CS.Uni-Magdeburg.De>]

Hello!

> [...]
> 
> It doesn't get much quicker than that, but this was for CPU boards
> that didn't support memory protection. Things would certainly get more
> complicated in MiNT.

I don't think that adding such things are a good idea.

> Anyway, no matter how they are implemented, I really do like counted
> semaphores that are not owned by a specific process when taken. The MiNT
> semaphores can really only be used for mutual exclusion, while mine work
> as well for message passing in various forms, etc.

Would be the sysV IPC mechanism helpful?

But at least it alway cost a system call and the cost for
blocking/unblocking processes. Also message sending require a copy
operation of the complete message (from one address space to another).
This is true for Fenix approach too (it just make sense for small
messages). This can be solved with shared memory.


Tschuess
   ...Frank

--
ATARI FALCON 040 // MILAN 060
-----------------------------------------
http://www.cs.uni-magdeburg.de/~fnaumann/
e-Mail: fnaumann@freemint.de