[coyotos-dev] Status and roadmap

[Sam Mason]

On Fri, Jan 19, 2007 at 12:19:52PM -0500, Jonathan Adams wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-01-19 at 16:27 +0000, Sam Mason wrote:
> > What happens if a process has designated itself as its exception handler
> > and faults in a non-activated state, then subsequently faults in the
> > activated state while handling the non-activated fault.  Does the FCRB
> > get overwritten by the activated fault, and the previous message get
> > lost?  Potentially confusing the handler when it tries to resume itself
> > after handling the exception it recieved while activated.
> 
> Remember that a process can have multiple FCRBs.  In this particular
> case, the first fault would be delivered directly to the process'
> activation handler, without using any kind of FCRB.  If the activation
> handler faulted while processing the first fault, a message is sent to
> the handler FCRB.

Does it, even notionally, go through a FCRB?  Or is the whole
fault procedure assumed to be atomic and therefore unaffected by
check-pointing?

> If the handler FCRB is *blocked*, then the process will block waiting
> for it to become unblocked.  If the handler FCRB is *unblocked*, then it
> will be sent the fault message.

When you say "handler FCRB" you mean the FCRB designated for fault
handling?  This got me very confused the first couple of times I went
through the email.


  Sam