Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 4 Mar 1999 15:28:03 +1100 | From | Richard Gooch <> | Subject | Re: MOSIX and kernel mods. |
| |
Richard Solis writes: > I couldn't agree more. > > But I do think there is value there because DIPC and friends could > be very valuable as tools for developing applications that work > better in a distributed manner. If each section of code (thread, > process) can operate within the framework that DIPC, et al. provide > then there is a good argument for providing that functionality as an > integrated part of the OS where things like filesystems and process > management and signalling can be coordinated with the help of the > kernel.
Actually, I don't think we really agree. My view is that using DIPC/MOSIX encourages bad programming and will hardly ever lead to efficient parallel applications. Now if someone wants to write a user space layer that gives them such a programming model, that's fine by me.
But I'd object to even one nanosecond of extra latency or one byte of kernel bloat to (exclusively) support such schemes, because I think they're flawed. It's the same reason we don't want STREAMS in the kernel. It's a flawed concept and it shouldn't bloat the kernel or kill performance for sensible networking.
Now, if DIPC/MOSIX requires a kernel module and perhaps some system calls, I don't mind if they are allocated some slots in the syscall table (just like we did for STREAMS). But anything else should stay out of the kernel.
Regards,
Richard....
- 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/
| |