au contraire again. microkernels don't show the effect of decoupling
them, they show the effect of distinct implementations of each
subsystem. again, your example:
>Process 1 Process 2 Process 3
>read data from a RT pipe and read from the file Gnuplot
>write to disk on the FS do computation
> output to standard out
>
>The closely coupled OS will correctly note the shared data between
>the three processes for a major performance win.
relies on the assumption that the file is a data storage device. the
framebuffer is not a data storage device, and neither is the network
interface, and there is *no* reason for there to be coupling between
i/o to them and the disk writes. Here's a different example:
Task 1 Task 2 Task 3
generates audio samples and copies data to disk on FS does FFT and
copies the data to a DAC displays result
there is no reason for the output of task 1, task 2 or task 3 to be
coupled (by locks and other kernel synchronization mechanisms) other
than the fact that will all copy data from the same page(s). i'm
starting to sound like a broken record here.
--p
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/