Hello!

[Blaine Garst]

On Feb 16, 2014, at 3:25 PM, Julian Stecklina <jsteckli at os.inf.tu-dresden.de> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On 02/15/2014 07:15 PM, Blaine Garst wrote:
>> let IPC be as pure as trap, swap mmu, jump
> 
> Since IPC on L4-like kernels usually allows capability/rights
> delegation, it is not quite as simple, but when I look at NOVA's IPC
> path[1] it roughly fits your description, even with some form of
> migrating threads. Check out the original paper[2] and another paper
> that describes the design of the IPC system in more detail[3].
> 
> That being said, in practice IPC performance is not as important as it
> may initially seem.

My initial goal is indeed to eliminate kernel scheduling and measure that win;
it happens to be the case that the user-land architecture for that is exactly
what I didn’t finish in my prototype, but now have, and so the IPC wins of
yester-decade again come to mind.

Minimal IPC times are a desirable side-effect for many reasons.

And thank you for the references!!  There is so much to read its great to start
with well-regarded work!

Blaine


> 
> Julian
> 
> [1] https://github.com/udosteinberg/NOVA/blob/master/src/syscall.cpp
>    Starts at sys_call.
> 
> [2] https://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/papers_ps/steinberg_eurosys2010.pdf
> [3]
> https://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/papers_ps/ospert2010_steinberg_boettcher_kauer.pdf
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
> 
> iEYEARECAAYFAlMBSPgACgkQ2EtjUdW3H9mW5ACeMA7gf1iyy7oXTbLR92q4yeMA
> bf4AnA2gpk+JkxANRJ0bIB11aMOGf9K8
> =YKo4
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> _______________________________________________
> l4-hackers mailing list
> l4-hackers at os.inf.tu-dresden.de
> http://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/mailman/listinfo/l4-hackers