Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Wed, 15 Sep 2004 15:12:37 +0100 | | From | Matt Kavanagh <> | | Subject | Re: monoholitic, hybrid or not monoholitic? |
| |
On Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 01:27:25PM +0200, Patrick Kiwitter- Mailinglist wrote: > Hash: SHA1 > > hello world, > > i've invested a couple of hours to find a correct description of the > linux kernel achritecture. most books or litretures (in general) are > talking about a monoholitic kernel (incl. linux kernel development - > robert love and understanding the linux kernel - oreilly). i also asked > google an read the kernel.org faq. > > the kernel were mostly descripted as monoholitic. but some sources means > that the linux kernel is not really monoholitic because of the feature > of loading kernel modules. some pages are talking about a "hybrid > kernel" which means that the kernel is a glue one, a little bit of > monoholitic and a little bit not. > > so i would like to receive detailed information where i can read a > correct description of course you can also post your comments here (if > allowed). by the way, yes i've read the "tanenbaum" reffering monoholitc. > > thanks a lot in advanced, > patrick > I'd tend towards monolithic because the modules (as mentioned) run in kernel space; but it's not a cookie-cutter case. Things are implemented in userspace that provide functionality normally included in the kernel; udev springs to mind, even if it is not the predominant solution. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |