On Wednesday, October 09, 2002 13:17 "Gernot Heiser" gernot@cse.unsw.edu.au said:
On Wed, 9 Oct 2002 11:38:26 +0900, "Alexey Mandrookin"
alman@mgateinc.com said:
AM> Hi, AM> does anybody interested in native OS implementation on top of a L4 AM> microkernel?
What's a "native OS implementation on top of a L4" for you? That seems a bit contradictory.
It is too difficult to explain my view. At least, it can be something like HURD, may be HURD itself. (Of course, I subscribed on hurd-l4 maillist).
It should be something like Linux. Not monolith Linux as l4-linux.
It should use real microkernel approach, where each device/protocol driver is a server in terms of microkernel.
Task context switching is a high cost operation, which causes bad microkernels performance. Right?
I believe future processors will be optimized for microkernels. The label "Designed for Microsoft Windows" on microprocessors makes me angry.
If you mean "L4-based OS written from scratch", have a look at mungi.org (runs on MIPS, Alpha and soon Itanium). There's also BiOS,
Thank you. Mungi is around my imagination of microkernel OS.
Anyway, the driver which I am going to donate to L4 will not depend on host OS - it is just a server. It is not good time to talk about.
an embedded OS for biomedical apps under development at UNSW (runs on StrongARM). Web site should be http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~bios/ (but isn't up yet).
At the moment, I'm not interested in embedded solutions, even if my current job is about that.
Best regards, Alexei