3 ms·
Ever since I studied how the *BSD and Linux kernels worked I felt it was not very elegant, it used to be like a web of spinlocks(analogy taken from a mail by Te
by Flow 13y ago
Ever since I studied how the *BSD and Linux kernels worked I felt it was not very elegant, it used to be like a web of spinlocks(analogy taken from a mail by Terry Lambert, FreeBSD developer). I think FreeBSD and Linux today use kernel-side threads and mailboxes a bit more, but it's not the foundation of how they work.
I'm hoping for an operating system where the kernel works like the AmigaOS exec.library with Tasks, MsgPorts and Signals, but offer a barrier where the outside could be a traditional ABI like the one Linux offer.
I've not looked, but I think Matt Dillon's DragonflyBSD is heading towards something like that.
- ansible 13y agoHave you looked at Minix yet?
- Flow 13y agoI have the book and have read some of it years ago. I can't remember if the OS-tasks were an isolated process or just a thread in shared memory. My first comment would be for a kernel built up using threads in shared memory communicating with signals and mailboxes.
- ansible 13y agoThey are separate processes. In fact it is possible to restart or replace then on a running system.
- pjmlp 13y agoSince 3.0, Minix changed the architecture. Now they are full micro-kernel, use NetBSD userspace tools, have EU funding and some commercial clients. If you wish I can provide more info.