[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Mach on L4
From: |
Jan Atle Ramsli |
Subject: |
Re: Mach on L4 |
Date: |
Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:29:21 +0200 |
Hello, Farid!
You don't know me, but I know you - the dangers of the information age :-)
ENTWARNUNG: Well, I follow help-hurd, that's all ...
> > Just a thought: How about introducing a kernel-abstraction layer to
> > the Hurd first? As a tactical goal, port the Hurd to Unix as its
> > underlying ``microkernel'' while keeping it working on Mach. This
> > refactoring should yield a Hurd that can easily be ported to other
> > kernels such as L4, and you don't need people acquainted with both
> > Mach and L4.
>
> I suggested exactly this approach in point 1. of:
> http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/bug-hurd/2000-October/003602.html
> The Hurd/Unix approach would be the libvk-{guest-os} variant. The
> more I think about it, the more sense it makes. You're the first
> one to suggest exactly this approach independently. That's quite
> an incentive to have a second try at it.
This made me happy.
I can only say I know one system like the 'inside of my pocket' - that system
disappeared and was pushed out by ... MSDOS.
It had 5 functions for IPC, based on the idea of a synchronized FIFO (OK, so
I'm lying, but it _feels_ like 5 functions).
QUEUE q = q_open(char *qname, int quesize)
q_read(QUEUE q, char* buffer) - q_cread(QUEUE q, char* buffer, BOOLEAN wait)
// the c is for 'conditional'
q_write(QUEUE q, char* buffer) - q_cwrite(QUEUE q, char* buffer, BOOLEAN wait)
q_close(QUEUE q)
It took me one week including testing to port a client server app from CDOS
to NetBIOS, this was in 1989.
It is a shame when good things go to waste, so I thought you might want to
know this.
A semaphore is easily constructed from this interface, and under CDOS, these
functions were implemented in tight assembly, so they were lightning fast.
I never seize to admire the simplicity and familiarity of this interface, you
have 5 functions to implement, even if you implement them using hex-codes, it
will not be a big task.
That was all I had to say ...
Atle
Jan Atle Ramsli
Concurrent-DOS guru :-)
OK, so I know TRS-DOS, SinTran and maybe one or two other OS's that you have
never heard of as well ...
- SawMill Multiserver vs. the Hurd, Farid Hajji, 2001/07/05
- Message not available
- Re: SawMill Multiserver vs. the Hurd, Farid Hajji, 2001/07/06
- Mach on L4 (was Re: SawMill Multiserver vs. the Hurd), Michael Hohmuth, 2001/07/12
- Re: Mach on L4 (was Re: SawMill Multiserver vs. the Hurd), Farid Hajji, 2001/07/17
- Re: Mach on L4, Michael Hohmuth, 2001/07/18
- Re: Mach on L4, Farid Hajji, 2001/07/18
- Re: Mach on L4, Michael Hohmuth, 2001/07/19
- Re: Mach on L4, Farid Hajji, 2001/07/20
- Re: Mach on L4, Michael Hohmuth, 2001/07/22
- Re: Mach on L4, Farid Hajji, 2001/07/22
- Re: Mach on L4,
Jan Atle Ramsli <=
- Re: Mach on L4, Farid Hajji, 2001/07/24