cgd@broadcom.com wrote:

> At Sun, 7 Jul 2002 01:11:26 +0000 (UTC), "Gregory McGarry" wrote:
> > Valid values for type (from Mach) are:
> > 
> > RAS_CONTROL_INSTALL_ONE
> > RAS_CONTROL_PURGE_ONE
> > RAS_CONTROL_PURGE_ALL
> > RAS_CONTROL_PURGE_ALL_AND_INSTALL_ONE
> > 
> > The semantics basically match the Mach usage.  RASs would be
> > inherited across a fork.
> 
> (Why is the latter useful enough to merit being implemented?)

As hard as I try, I can't think of any reason.
 
	-- Gregory McGarry <g.mcgarry@ieee.org>