[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: behavior of NO SENDERS notifications when receive rights move

From: Brent W. Baccala
Subject: Re: behavior of NO SENDERS notifications when receive rights move
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 18:19:58 -1000

On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 7:00 AM, Kalle Olavi Niemitalo <kon@iki.fi> wrote:
"Brent W. Baccala" <cosine@freesoft.org> writes:

> Now I'm wondering - how would DEAD NAME notifications be handled?  rpctrace
> would want to transfer send rights with the DN notifications attached (so
> it could wrap them both), but my experience, and my understanding of the
> Mach documentation, is that moving a send right with a DN request triggers
> a PORT DELETED notification, which is not what we would want.

Before rpctrace moves the send right from the target task, it
could call mach_port_request_notification to cancel the dead-name
notification request.  This call returns the send-once right to
which the notification would have been sent.  After rpctrace has
moved the rights, it could restore the notification request,
now with a wrapped send right and a wrapped send-once right.

Good idea!  We can also use the same approach to handle no-sender notifications - separate them from the receive rights before moving them both.  So I think we're OK destroying no-sender notifications when moving receive rights.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]