Petko Manolov <petkan@spct.net> writes:
> yoann@mandrakesoft.com wrote:
> >
> > "Johan Kullstam" <kullstam@ne.mediaone.net> writes:
> >
> > > Tonglu Yi <tlyi@fm365.com> writes:
> > >
> > > > linux is not micro kernel based OS, would it change to that in the
> > > > future?
> > >
> > > never say never, but the chances of this happening are slim and none.
> > >
> > > especially since linux has automatic loading and unloading of kernel
> > > modules, the advantages of microkernel are few.
> >
> > There is advantage : with microkernel, you have one kernel, which is
> > really small and run on top of the system which is there to manage
> > basic task, all the other stuff ( drivers for exemple ) are located
> > in userspace.
>
> Most cpu architectures don't have more than two levels - kernel and
> user.
I don't see this as a problem, please explain...
> AFAIK Linus don't like the idea of micro kernel and i bet it won't
> happen soon (if happens at all ;-).
agree :)))
>
> > The advantage is that there is really not many chance for the kernel
> > to crash, as it only do minimal thing.
> >
> > If a driver crash, it doesn't disturb the kernel.
>
> Moving all drivers in user level is *bad* idea.
It will clearly be slower, but please give reason for that thinking :)
-- -- Yoann http://www.mandrakesoft.com/~yoann/ It is well known that M$ product don't make a free() after a malloc(), the unix community wish them good luck for their future developement.- 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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 15 2000 - 21:00:18 EST