> One important point I see is that there is a bit of a misnomer in the > existing ISM name in that our ISM device does in fact *not* share > memory in the common sense of the "shared memory" wording. Maybe this is the trap i fell into. So are you saying it is not a dual port memory mapped into two CPUs physical address space? In another email there was reference to shm. That would be a VMM equivalent, a bunch of pages mapped into two processes address space. This comes back to the lack of top level architecture documentation. Outside reviewers such as i will have difficultly making useful contributions, and seeing potential overlap and reuse with other systems, without having a basic understanding of what you are talking about. Andrew
