[coyotos-dev] Sleep for interval

[Marcus Brinkmann]

At Sun, 30 Sep 2007 12:33:40 -0400,
"Jonathan S. Shapiro" <shap at eros-os.com> wrote:
> But your example does prompt me to notice a much more general failing of
> emulation. The kernel contract is that a kernel always appears to be
> available. This implies that a non-blocking message sent to the kernel
> will not block for reason of unavailability. Unfortunately, the same is
> not true of a non-blocking send that goes to an emulator.

The seL4 specification is clear to point out that emulating kernel
objects is only guaranteed to be transparent if the emulating process
runs with a higher priority than the emulated process(es).

Thanks,
Marcus

PS: More interesting (and much more difficult a problem) than
emulating all kernel objects is the emulation of selected kernel
objects.