Messages in this thread | | | From | (H. Peter Anvin) | Subject | Re: Kernel interface changes (was Re: cdrecord problems on | Date | 6 Feb 1999 01:19:58 GMT |
| |
Followup to: <Pine.LNX.3.95.990205152900.606K-100000@penguin.transmeta.com> By author: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > On Fri, 5 Feb 1999, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote: > > > > I REPEAT: AFS IS NON-NEGOTIABLE HERE. > > I repeat: _I_ don't care. >
Let me do a translation of what I think everyone is saying here:
* The Linux module interface is designed to minimize overhead. That means raw linkage into the kernel, which means when the kernel changes, so does the module interface.
* A stable ABI requires some kind of layering to isolate it from changes to the kernel code (otherwise the kernel would be effectively barred from any improvements.)
* NT does such layering for everything, which is part of why its performance sucks so badly.
* Linux will not do such layering for everything. However, there is no reason why one can't build a layered ABI adapter (effectively an ABI to API converter) on top of Linux. This implies some performance cost, but will allow binary modules to work more or less indefinitely, barring huge changes to the kernel internals.
* Linus Torvalds has no interest whatsoever in developing such a plug-in ABI. Someone else is welcome to do it.
-hpa -- "Linux is a very complete and sophisticated operating system. There are, and will be, large numbers of applications available for it." -- Paul Maritz, Group Vice President for Platforms And Applications, Microsoft Corporation [Reference at: http://www.kernel.org/~hpa/ms.html]
- 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/
| |