From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: pnr@planet.nl (Paul Ruizendaal)
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 00:42:53 +0100
Subject: [TUHS] Kernel Sizes
In-Reply-To: <mailman.4.1516572202.3873.tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org>
References: <mailman.4.1516572202.3873.tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org>
Message-ID: <39C0AA03-1D57-470E-8D40-58DF7EEC0EFE@planet.nl>


> A self-imposed limit of 16K held in v1, and was quite fully utilized.
> When the iernel was rewritten in C, the limit (perhaps larger by then)
> influenced the C compiler. More than one optimization was stimulated
> by the need to keep the kernel in bounds.
> 
> Doug


The LSX kernel was kept within a self-imposed limit of 16KB as well.

I've often thought that LSX was V5 'regressed' to the concepts of
V1, which was facing similar hardware constraints. Is that a
reasonable view?

For example, LSX has a maximum of three processes that are swapped
in and out in a stack-like fashion. Only one process is ever in core.

Is that how V1 was organized?

I realize that LSX was API compatible with V5/V6 and I don't mean
'regressed' in that sense.

Paul