At Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:53:43 -0500, "Jonathan S. Shapiro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue, 2005-11-01 at 01:22 +0100, Bernhard Kauer wrote: > > > we may safely conclude that these CALL/RETURN patterns > > > describe the overwhelming majority of IPCs -- all of the other patterns > > > taken together accounted in EROS for less than 1% of all dynamic IPCs. > > > > Is the CALL/RETURN pattern used for capability delegation (giving an cap > > to another party) or only for usage of these capabilities? > > For delegation, we tend to see a CALL/RETURN pair in which one of the > arguments to the CALL is the capability being delegated. > > However, these delegations are dynamically very rare in comparison to > *uses* of capabilities. As an imperfect intuition: delegation tends to > occur during program setup, but rarely during program steady-state > execution. A delegation:use ratio of 1:100 or even 1:1000 would not be > an unreasonable expectation.
Does this include capabilities returned in the return of the call? Like, for example in dir_open? Thanks, Marcus _______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
