From: forsyth@caldo.demon.co.uk
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] micro vs monolithic kernels
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 10:09:11 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20010409091150.D186E19A06@mail.cse.psu.edu> (raw)
>>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..
the implied comparison is false. to start with, the plan 9 kernel
is not `monolithic'. it is highly modular.
in particular, the interfaces between the kernel and device drivers,
and between the IP device driver and its protocol and media drivers,
are all narrow, well-structured interfaces. indeed, some things that
are implemented by `system calls' in other systems are just separable,
configurable device drivers in this one.
modularity is not in an `iff' relationship with structuring using message passing and processes.
another answer is possibly that they wanted it to do something useful.
perhaps there is a connection with cray's comment:
If you were plowing a field what would you rather use, 2 strong oxen or 1024 chickens? -Seymour Cray
next reply other threads:[~2001-04-09 9:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-04-09 9:09 forsyth [this message]
2001-04-09 9:32 ` Dave Iafrate - CSCI/F1997
2001-04-09 16:14 ` Douglas A. Gwyn
-- 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
2001-04-08 19:36 presotto
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=20010409091150.D186E19A06@mail.cse.psu.edu \
--to=forsyth@caldo.demon.co.uk \
--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).