Jonathan S. Shapiro
shap at eros-os.org
Fri Jan 2 16:49:40 CET 2004
On Thu, 2004-01-01 at 19:37, Benno wrote:
> In Mungi we are definately pursuing fine-grained decomposition. (At
> least I believe we are, others may have a different definition of
> fine-grained though ;).
> And of course as Volkmar has mentioned that is the aim of the Sawmill
> project too. Or are you talking more fine grained than that?
I'm thinking of environments in which single applications are divided
into multiple protection domains for reasons of robustness and recovery.
In such a design, sender-id != application-id, and it is important that
this distinction be efficient.
The last time I looked, the Sawmill effort was still working on
separating drivers out of the kernel. This, in my opinion, was necessary
but was not an advance in the state of the art. I'm not aware of any
work on native application environment for Sawmill. If such work has
been documented, I would really welcome a pointer to a paper or a
I do not *remember* discussion of application environment for Sawmill,
but in those days Sawmill was pretty young. Perhaps things have gone
further since then.
More information about the l4-hackers