Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932095AbVJCAnI (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Oct 2005 20:43:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932096AbVJCAnH (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Oct 2005 20:43:07 -0400 Received: from zproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.162.199]:58500 "EHLO zproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932095AbVJCAnG convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Oct 2005 20:43:06 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=kIPtvuP0LTiIAcq4Mos5bpirc1VtvCvYgkgZlLb49ANTKOaNYQfL0ZCkPqIREYNhiuBzzbl98MKbqgi0Ski/vUv7V59ZuLDe4Ii/pV8+U9q7x2JiGeJXPutpmOp4XqboB90n1Gh0x7x2KO+v3NQWVX3YXg1VxlcBPnhu10O+PBs= Message-ID: <3e1162e60510021743q46948f93qaea4a0ce0dd61b8d@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 17:43:05 -0700 From: David Leimbach Reply-To: David Leimbach To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: what's next for the linux kernel? In-Reply-To: <20051003003615.GA2440@kurtwerks.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Disposition: inline References: <20051002204703.GG6290@lkcl.net> <20051003003615.GA2440@kurtwerks.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1685 Lines: 36 > > it's a daft, monolithic design that is suitable and faster on > > single-processor systems, and that design is going to look _really_ > > outdated, really soon. > > Andrew Tannenbaum said the same thing in the early 1990s. That we're > here still having this discussion >10 years later is telling. Dr. > Tannenbaum might have been acadmeically and theoretically correct, > but, with a nod to OS X, the Linux kernel has proven itself by > implementation and has proven to be remarkably adaptable. Why are you nodding to OS X? It's not a real micokernel either. It just happens to have all the foobage of a microkernel in a rather monolithic design. The reason that the bsd personality is in the same address space as the mach bits is because they didn't want to deal with the overheads of the message passing from kernel to userspace. The L4 people figured out how to get a lot of those inefficiencies to disappear and L4Linux is quite "performant". In some cases, L4Linux can be used to provide a device driver for other L4 threads that would normally have to write their own [in user space and even with respectable performance http://www.ertos.nicta.com.au/Research/ULDD/Performance.pml] That's an interesting re-use and combination of several philosophies if you ask me. There is a lot of "what's next for linux" going on behind the scenes and the current path of linux is apparently good enough for accomplishing it. - Dave - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/