l4-hackers

l4-hackers@os.inf.tu-dresden.de

2 participants
2880 discussions

Re: GMD paper
by Michael Hohmuth 25 May '99

25 May '99

"Adam 'WeirdArms' Wiggins" <awiggins(a)cse.unsw.edu.au writes: > Anyone know where I can get a copy of: > > Jochen Liedtke: > Improved Address Space Switching on Pentium Processors by > Transparently Multiplexing User Address Spaces > (GMD technical report) This paper is now available (along with many other interesting papers from Jochen) from <URL:http://i30www.ira.uka.de/images/b_publications_on.gif>. The URL for the paper you're looking for is <URL:http://i30www.ira.uka.de/publications/pubcat/As-pent.ps>. Michael -- hohmuth(a)innocent.com, hohmuth(a)sax.de http://www.sax.de/~hohmuth/

1 0

Re: Please help me!
by Michael Hohmuth 25 May '99

25 May '99

"benben xiao" <xiaoxiaoben(a)hotmail.com> writes: > Hi; > When I see the file "init.h" in "l4/server/sigma0/src/",I meet a problem. > Although I have know: > #define L4_NORETURN __attribute__((noreturn)) > but I don't understand the function definition: > void init(struct multiboot_info *mbi, unsigned int flag, > l4_kernel_info_t *info) L4_NORETURN; > there why we can use "L4_NORETURN" and what is the effect of > "L4_NORETURN". __attribute__((noreturn)) is an extension supported by the GNU C compiler. It is intended to be used with functions that are not supposed to return. When a function declared with this attribute looks like it returns anyway, the compiler issues a warning. Please consult the Gcc documentation for more details (on most system, you can run "info gcc 'c extensions' 'function attr'"). Michael -- hohmuth(a)innocent.com, hohmuth(a)inf.tu-dresden.de http://home.pages.de/~hohmuth/

1 0

Re: basis of L4-Linux
by Michael Hohmuth 25 May '99

25 May '99

suzukis(a)file.phys.tohoku.ac.jp writes: > uname returned Linux 2.0.21(or 20?) - I remember, L4-Linux > seems to be based old kernel source. But the L4-Linux source > also seems to include something taken from later kernel > source (ex. Configure.help). L4-Linux will be rewritten > from the later Linux kernel (ex. 2.0.36, or 2.2.x)? > Or, will be a branch from the old kernel? We have been working internally on a port of Linux 2.2 to L4, and I'm positive that we can release it ``soon.'' > If asking about L4-Linux is off-topic, please let me know > who/where I could ask about L4-Linux. No, that's fine, you're on-topic. Michael -- hohmuth(a)innocent.com, hohmuth(a)inf.tu-dresden.de http://home.pages.de/~hohmuth/

1 0

Please help me!
by benben xiao 25 May '99

25 May '99

Hi; When I see the file "init.h" in "l4/server/sigma0/src/",I meet a problem. Although I have know: #define L4_NORETURN __attribute__((noreturn)) but I don't understand the function definition: void init(struct multiboot_info *mbi, unsigned int flag, l4_kernel_info_t *info) L4_NORETURN; there why we can use "L4_NORETURN" and what is the effect of "L4_NORETURN". Thank you! ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

1 0

basis of L4-Linux
by suzukis＠file.phys.tohoku.ac.jp 21 May '99

21 May '99

Hello, Just I've checked Fiasco (990428), L4-Linux (981207) and grub-ext2fs-floppy. Although compiling OSKit was truncated as FAQ (relocation trucated), Fiasco & L4-Linux was bootable on my PC which Debian 2.0. Except of X window system, most work well, as original Linux. It was quite impressive & exciting! I've never impressed as such. uname returned Linux 2.0.21(or 20?) - I remember, L4-Linux seems to be based old kernel source. But the L4-Linux source also seems to include something taken from later kernel source (ex. Configure.help). L4-Linux will be rewritten from the later Linux kernel (ex. 2.0.36, or 2.2.x)? Or, will be a branch from the old kernel? If asking about L4-Linux is off-topic, please let me know who/where I could ask about L4-Linux. Sorry for poor English.

1 0

Re: What is RMGR?
by Michael Hohmuth 10 May '99

10 May '99

°í¿µ¿õ <yuko(a)os.korea.ac.kr> writes: > Anyone know the relation between L4 and RMGR? > I cannot understand. -_- > > I want to know > 1) If L4 kernel could boot without RMGR?. RMGR is essential part of L4? Yes, and no, respectively. It is well possible to construct L4-based or Fiasco-based systems without Rmgr, and we have done so in the past. However, nowadays we always use Rmgr because it provides a very convenient way for bootstrapping a system. > 2) If it is essential module for L4, the size of L4 microkernel must > include RMGR size? Even then it probably wouldn't count because once the system is up and running, Rmgr is mostly idle. It certainly doesn't hurt the system performance because it doesn't induce a measurable load on the CPU caches. > I want to get related papers or documentation. Except for the manpage at <URL:http://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/L4/l4libman/rmgr.html>, there aren't any. Rmgr just happens to be an application everyone uses. Michael -- hohmuth(a)innocent.com, hohmuth(a)sax.de http://www.sax.de/~hohmuth/

1 0

GMD paper
by Adam 'WeirdArms' Wiggins 10 May '99

10 May '99

Anyone know where I can get a copy of: Jochen Liedtke: Improved Address Space Switching on Pentium Processors by Transparently Multiplexing User Address Spaces (GMD technical report) Cheers Adam

2 1

Re: New Fiasco snapshot
by Michael Hohmuth 10 May '99

10 May '99

David Welch <david.welch(a)st-edmund-hall.oxford.ac.uk> writes: > I am having problems using the snapshot. It builds and boots > ok but as soon as I try to fork/exec another program it freezes. > > I am using a Cyrix processor (without the 4MB page extensions), > and the latest Fiasco snapshot (including the released patches) as > well as the latest L4Linux server and patches. [...] I suppose by fork/exec you mean the corresponding L4Linux system calls? If your problem is related to your CPU not having 4MB-page extensions, then there's a good chance that I will come across it this week: Other people have reported problems with non-Pentium CPUs too, so my sysadmin has organized an old 486 for me to debug Fiasco on. Michael -- hohmuth(a)innocent.com, hohmuth(a)inf.tu-dresden.de http://home.pages.de/~hohmuth/

2 1

Re: L4 threadid ver0 and ver1 bits
by Michael Hohmuth 10 May '99

10 May '99

"Adam 'WeirdArms' Wiggins" <awiggins(a)cse.unsw.edu.au> writes: > I think they were seperate in the Intel for efficiency reasons, Yes, that's right: The way the bits are laid out in thread ids, it takes the kernel only one AND and one OR to compute the address of the thread control block; no shifts or lookups necessary. (Fiasco actually currently adds a shift because the kernel stack contained in the thread control blocks is larger to accommodate for the fact that higher-level languages need more stack space.) Michael -- hohmuth(a)innocent.com, hohmuth(a)inf.tu-dresden.de http://home.pages.de/~hohmuth/

1 0

L4 threadid ver0 and ver1 bits
by Daniel Potts 10 May '99

10 May '99

Hi, What is the precise meaning of the ver0 and ver1 bits in the L4 thread ids? Cheers, Daniel

2 3

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

l4-hackers