4 ms·
True, but the last time I checked (several years ago), the size of the portion of code that is not drivers or kernel modules was still 7 million lines of code,
by darksaints 1y ago
True, but the last time I checked (several years ago), the size of the portion of code that is not drivers or kernel modules was still 7 million lines of code, and the average system still has to load a few million more via kernel modules and drivers. That is still a phenomenally large attack surface.
The SeL4 kernel is 10k lines of code. OKL4 is 13k. QNX is ~30k.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- arp242 1y agoCan I run Firefox or PostgreSQL with reasonable performance on SeL4, OKL4, or QNX?
- doubled112 1y agoReasonable performance includes GPU acceleration for both rendering and decoding media, right?
- 0x457 1y agoyes
- arp242 1y agoNot necessarily; short-comings or "TODO"s are okay. I just want to know if I can run actual real-world complex applications on these micro-kernels, and what the trade-offs are (if any). Firefox on OpenBSD has fairly reasonable performance, but is quite a lot slower than on Linux. It's a perfectly reasonable trade-off, but you do need to be aware of it. I've asked this question a few times over the last few years when people bring up "we must use microkernel now! They already exist!"-type posts, and thus far the response has either been crickets or vague hand-waving with microbenchmarks that bear no relation to real-world programs.
- yencabulator 1y agoSeL4 was not built for multiple CPU cores, it's not going to perform with modern day "high end" hardware and last I looked its formal proofs don't apply to multicore systems.