olafBuddenhagen@gmx.net, le Mon 14 Mar 2011 03:21:43 +0100, a écrit :
> > There, the
> > rendez-vous port is thus the same as the reply port obtained above,
> > with the *same name*.
> > - reauth() destroys the rendez-vous port (and thus the name!)
> > - a bit later, diskfs_S_io_reauthenticate has finished its work,
> > and deallocates its rendez-vous port. But the name doesn't exist any
> > more. Bad.
>
> I wonder, why is the rendez-vous port actually destroyed, instead of
> just unreferencing the right?
(using mach_port_deallocate instead of mach_port_destroy indeed seems
to fix the issue, but there may be reasons for destroy rather than
deallocate?)