lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Oct]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: Topic for discussion: OS Design
Date
In article <20001022162919.B2478@zed.dcl> you wrote:
> A few years ago, there was an intense debate around the question of
> cooperative vs. preemptive multitasking operating system design. Today,
> however, cooperative multitasking is a thing of the past, and it is virtual=
> ly
> undisputed that the preemptive multitasking design is highly superior to the
> cooperative one.

No, this completely depends on the Task the OS has to do and the Hardware
the OS has to run on. Cooperative Systems can have a lot more throughput
than time sliced systems.

> It would seem that a microkernel design would fix most of these problems. =
> Two
> very elegant operating systems, namely the Amiga's exec.library and QNX's
> Neutrino (I'm sure you can name others), used microkernels, and they were b=
> oth
> *very* efficient.

The problem is, that Linux is not a Microkernel Based System. So if you want
a microkernel based system ust used one. There are lot out there. Based on
MACH or whatever. You can consier to work with the HURD. I mean it is not a
bad idea to rethink design of the Linux Kernel, but changing it into a
Microkernel means rewriting it. And I am not sure it will helo the Linux
development a lot (remeber ist WAS the fastest among all others, this can be
due to the fact that the monolitic kernel is supperior in development
effords).

Grettings
Bernd
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:41    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans