9fans - fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: presotto@plan9.bell-labs.com
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] micro vs monolithic kernels
Date: Sun,  8 Apr 2001 15:36:08 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20010408193610.A1114199FD@mail.cse.psu.edu> (raw)

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 117 bytes --]

Because you need a brain the size of a planet to design a
microkernel based system and we only have egos that big.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 2214 bytes --]

From: Andrey A Mirtchovski <aam396@mail.usask.ca>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: [9fans] micro vs monolithic kernels
Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2001 11:55:22 -0600 (CST)
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10104081148380.17278-100000@ultra5d.usask.ca>

hello all,

i seem to remember reading somewhere a reasoning on why it was chosen to
implement p9 with a monolithic kernel, instead of a micro one..

i can't find the link anymore, so i'd like to ask for, either pointers to any
documents discussing this, or a brief explanation in an email from anyone,
who feels they can give me one..

let me state the question clearly: why did the bell-labs team chose to
implement plan9 using a monolithic kernel?


i realize that a comparative analysis of the two architectures can lead to a
flamefest, so i ask only for facts :)


andrey

             reply	other threads:[~2001-04-08 19:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-04-08 19:36 presotto [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-04-17  8:35 nemo
2001-04-10 11:56 forsyth
2001-04-10 11:50 forsyth
2001-04-10 11:35 Matt
2001-04-10 10:52 forsyth
     [not found] <200104092210.RAA06371@einstein.ssz.com>
2001-04-09 22:12 ` Jim Choate
2001-04-10  9:00   ` Boyd Roberts
2001-04-09 22:00 jmk
2001-04-09 22:30 ` Jim Choate
2001-04-09 21:47 presotto
2001-04-09 21:43 Russ Cox
2001-04-09 22:16 ` Jim Choate
2001-04-10  8:59   ` Douglas A. Gwyn
2001-04-10  9:00   ` Boyd Roberts
2001-04-09 21:15 Russ Cox
2001-04-09 21:52 ` Jim Choate
2001-04-09 21:36   ` Lyndon Nerenberg
2001-04-09 22:08     ` Jim Choate
2001-04-09 22:34       ` Lyndon Nerenberg
2001-04-10  0:45       ` Steve Kilbane
2001-04-10  0:28         ` Jim Choate
2001-04-10  8:18           ` Steve Kilbane
2001-04-10  8:57       ` Douglas A. Gwyn
2001-04-09 21:40   ` William Josephson
2001-04-09 22:10     ` Jim Choate
2001-04-09 22:16       ` William Josephson
2001-04-09 22:42   ` Dan Cross
2001-04-09 23:10     ` Jim Choate
2001-04-10  0:30       ` Dan Cross
2001-04-09 22:10 ` Mike Haertel
     [not found] <john@cs.york.ac.uk>
2001-04-09 14:33 ` John A. Murdie
2001-04-09 23:31   ` Steve Kilbane
2001-04-09 10:19 forsyth
2001-04-09  9:09 forsyth
2001-04-09  9:32 ` Dave Iafrate - CSCI/F1997
2001-04-09 16:14   ` Douglas A. Gwyn
2001-04-08 17:55 Andrey A Mirtchovski

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20010408193610.A1114199FD@mail.cse.psu.edu \
    --to=presotto@plan9.bell-labs.com \
    --cc=9fans@cse.psu.edu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).