Thanks for your compilation. Do you have found actual benchmark tests? https://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/faq/slow.html <https://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/faq/slow.html> "The Hurd is currently slower than Linux, yes. But not very much, so it is completely usable." Vulnerabilities of processors is also sensitive task. Maybe RISC-V will not have such bugs? Need to know in a practice.
Mar 31, 2019, 12:05 AM by mikadoz...@yandex.com: > # Appreciation > > I appreciate: > > * many of Guix's design decisions. The one that is relevant to this > discussion is the kernel. I like that Guix uses the linux-libre (no > binary blobs) instead of the linux kernel. > > * that work is underway to get Guix to work with GNU Hurd. I like that > a microkernel is a potential kernel option. > > > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2016-12/msg00857.html > <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2016-12/msg00857.html> > > * the effort that has been put into GNU Hurd to get it to where it is. > > * the bootsrapping initiative. > > > https://bootstrappable.org <https://bootstrappable.org/> > > https://fosdem.org/2019/schedule/event/gnumes > <https://fosdem.org/2019/schedule/event/gnumes/> > > # Intent > > * I would like to understand why GNU Hurd is being focused > on (my perception) given other microkernel options. > * I want to share what I have found after doing some looking into > microkernels. > * I am curious what others think of microkernels. > > I mention the appreciations above because I am aiming for a tone of > appreciation and curiosity and not a critical one. The tone can be a > challenge for written communication. > > # My microkernel experience > > Currently I do not have any practical experience using any microkernel. > I have just spent time looking into the topic as it is interesting to > me. > > # Why microkernels? > > I think Andrew Tanenbaum explains benefits of microkernel entertainingly > in this talk: > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bx3KuE7UjGA > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bx3KuE7UjGA> > > The talks has a focus on Minix but I think the benefits are transferable > to other microkernels. > > # GNU Hurd > > ## Perceived focus > > I looks to me like there is a effort (which I appreciate) to get Guix > working on Hurd. I get this perception from: > > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2016-12/msg00857.html > <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2016-12/msg00857.html> > > These comments from this thread: > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-guix/2019-03/msg00158.html > <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-guix/2019-03/msg00158.html> > > Ricardo Wurmus: "Let’s work on the Hurd, people! It’s beautiful!" > > Jan Nieuwenhuizen: "FWIW the Mes port to the Hurd is ongoing and mes now > runs, next thing up is fork which we need for running mescc." > > ## Critiques of Hurd > > I would be curious what people think about these third party critiques > (not mine) of Hurd. > > ### From X15 > > https://www.sceen.net/x15 <https://www.sceen.net/x15/> > > "Although the design of the Hurd is promising and attractive, its > implementation has a number of severe issues. X15 takes the approach of > the complete rewrite to make sure that key ideas are kept in mind at all > times during development. Since it’s not meant to be compatible with the > Hurd, critical interfaces such as IPC and signals can be re-implemented > completely differently. There is a lot of emphasis on code quality and > ease of maintenance, obtained from disciplined application of best > practices." > > ### From HelenOS > > http://www.helenos.org/wiki/FAQ#HowisHelenOSdifferentfromGNUHurd > <http://www.helenos.org/wiki/FAQ#HowisHelenOSdifferentfromGNUHurd> > > ### Why Hurd? > > Why the focus on Hurd given other microkernel options? I ask this > question out of curiosity and a lack of practical experience with > microkernels. > > # Microkernel wish list > > These are things that I see as desirable in a microkernel. > > ## Free software > > It should be completely free software. No binary blobs included. It > looks like all of the microkernel listed here are: > http://www.microkernel.info <http://www.microkernel.info/> > > ## RISC-V > > RISC-V a free and open instruction set architecture is a nice complement > to a free operating system. It is nice if a mircokernel already has > plans to run on RISC-V. > > Intel security issues: > https://libreboot.org/faq.html#intel <https://libreboot.org/faq.html#intel> > > ARM security issues: > https://libreboot.org/faq.html#amd <https://libreboot.org/faq.html#amd> > > ### Entirely free RISC-V computers > > These two initiatives are entirely free hardware based on RISC-V. > > * HiFive Unleashed > > https://www.sifive.com/boards/hifive-unleashed > <https://www.sifive.com/boards/hifive-unleashed> > > * lowRISC > > https://www.lowrisc.org <https://www.lowrisc.org> > > ## Formal verification > > An application of the minimality principle in the design of microkernel > leads to smaller code bases which are amenable to formal verification. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microkernel#Essential_components_and_minimality > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microkernel#Essential_components_and_minimality> > > I see the extra security assurance that formal verification provide as > desirable. > > # Alternative microkernels > > I used > http://www.microkernel.info <http://www.microkernel.info/>> as the > starting point when I began > looking into microkernels. > > ## Summary of interesting microkernels > > This is a high level summary based on the "Microkernel wish list" above. > All of these are free software. I am likely missing some other > interesting microkernel projects. > > | projects | RISC-V efforts | Formal verification | > |--------------+----------------+---------------------| > | sel4.systems | Yes | Yes | > | genode.org | Yes | Yes | > | helenos.org | Yes | No | > | muen.sk | ?/No | Yes | > | minix3.org | ?/No | No | > | hurd.gnu.org | ?/No | No | > > Note: > > * ?/No is where (to me without asking) there does not look like there > have been efforts to make the project work with RISC-V. > > * Genode is different than the others as it is not just a microkernel. > I have given Genode Yes for both RISC-V and Formal verification > because it can use the seL4 microkernel. It can also use other > microkernels beyond just seL4. > > ## Other interesting projects > > robigalia.org: based on seL4 microkernel which is formally verified and > has RISC-V efforts underway. It is using Rust to build the parts that > would normally be part of a monolithic kernel in user space. It looks > like a young project. > > redox-os.org: Rust based microkernel project. It looks like a young > project. > > ## Projects I have not looked into > > I have not looked at the following projects which were also listed on > http://www.microkernel.info <http://www.microkernel.info/>> > > * github.com/Nils-TUD/Escape > * github.com/f9micro > * l4re.org > * github.com/TUD-OS/M3 > * hypervisor.org >
