Hans Reiser <[email protected]> wrote:
[...]
> I think the exokernel approach by Frans is a very interesting approach.
> I wish I had the experience with it necessary to know if it was
> effective. I do NOT take the position that name resolution should be in
> the kernel. I DO take the position that it should be either in the
> kernel or out of the kernel, and should constitute one cohesive and
> coherent body of code.
Right.
> If someone talks Linus into trying the exokernel
> approach,
Are you nuts?! Such radical experiments do /not/ belong in the kernel on
which millions of machines depend!
Go and fork off a branch to play around with this, and if it does show real
promise, you can then come back and try to integrate this into the official
kernel.
> I will be happy to educate myself to where I have an opinion
> on whether that works. It is easy to see powerful advantages to the
> exokernel approach: I wish I understood the security model for it, and I
> wish I was sure that name resolution would not require too many context
> switches as one fetches each storage component required by a name
> resolution.
Exactly the kinds of questions that have to get solid answers before any
experimental patches can get off the ground.
--
Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org
Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239
Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |