>> not intending to pour gas on the flames, but there have been a number of
>> ukernels since that are a fraction of the size of p9 (and less functional,
>> by design).  Some with very good performance.
>
> i'm not sure what "good performance" means.  is there enough
> functionality in current µkernels to even benchmark real work
> against plan 9?

you can microbenchmark the ukernel itself and run macrobenchmarks
on operating systems sitting atop the ukernel.

btw, there's even been one ukernel recently that has a formal
proof of correctness (against its specification and some containment
properties).  Roughly a 10 man-year effort for about 7.5kloc.
Not something you'd likely be able to do yet against something linux-
sized.

> the original problem posed was the "scalability of linux development".
> how does l4 help with linux' development problems?

no idea.

> - erik

Tim Newsham
http://www.thenewsh.com/~newsham/