home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- From: Chuck.Phillips@FtCollins.NCR.COM (Chuck.Phillips)
-
-
- >>>>> On 23 May 90 16:31:58 GMT, mikes@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Mike Schultz) said:
- Mike> For REAL TIME purposes, shared memory functionality is very useful, but
- Mike> REQUIRING it to map files would be unacceptable for many implementations.
-
- It *seems* to me that directly implementing mmap() with SVr4 semantics
- under VMS, AGEIS (and of course Multics :-) would be possible. UNIX
- appears to be the late comer with shared memory. Am I missing something?
-
- Mike> ...
-
- Mike> Now here are the latest developments. SVR4 has taken the step of
- Mike> implementing mmap without requiring it to be a file. It states that one
- Mike> is mapping in a virtual memory object instead. It may be possible for
- Mike> the SVR4 wording of mmap to be used as existing practice. There will
- Mike> have to be some functionality labeled as implementation defined.
-
- Regarding IPC and mmap():
-
- If I understand the SVr4 implementation of mmap() correctly, it is only
- possible to share write enabled memory between processes if mmap()ing a
- file system file, but not possible using "anonymous" (a.k.a. swap) memory.
- Is it possible, and if it is possible, are you restricted to sharing
- anonymous memory between parent and child processes due to lack of a
- file system handle?
-
- In any case, is (or are there plans for) one of the POSIX groups to address
- mmap() (or whatever it will be called) specificly as a method of IPC? It
- appears SVr4 shared memory (shmat(), et al) offers little mmap() does not
- (or couldn't easily be added, like handles).
-
- Sorry if this posting is redundant. We only recently started recieving a
- full comp.* feed.
-
- Thanks in advance,
- --
- Chuck Phillips MS440
- NCR Microelectronics Chuck.Phillips%FtCollins.NCR.com
- Ft. Collins, CO. 80525 uunet!ncrlnk!ncr-mpd!bach!chuckp
-
- Volume-Number: Volume 20, Number 29
-
-