I trust the code as long as it's behaving correctly, when it encounters a bug I no longer trust it and I shut it down before it can do further harm. A modular HTTP server should do the same.
The OS/process analogy doesn't hold here. The process has completely isolated state from the kernel.
> The OS/process analogy doesn't hold here. The process has completely isolated state from the kernel.
In one direction. That's why I'm asking you if you reboot your machine when your kernel dereferences a wild pointer when executing a system call on behalf a process - in theory it could have corrupted the kernel itself or any process on the system, but Linux makes a practice of trying to just abort execution of the system call, kill the process, and keep going.
If that's what Linux does, that seems fully intentional and the possible consequences on kernel state are probably well-thought out. Are you claiming what Linux does normally is unsafe and could possibly corrupt kernel state? Like every EFAULT? If that's not your claim, then the analogy doesn't hold and you're entirely missing my point.
That is absolutely my claim, and I am absolutely claiming that it is not well-thought-out - it's literally doing this in response to any fault from kernelspace. If you were unlucky enough that the wild pointer referred to someone else's memory, well, sucks to be you, some random process on your system (or random file on disk, or whatever) has memory corruption and nobody even knew.
The OS/process analogy doesn't hold here. The process has completely isolated state from the kernel.