On Feb 16, 2014, at 3:25 PM, Julian Stecklina <[email protected]> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 02/15/2014 07:15 PM, Blaine Garst wrote: >> let IPC be as pure as trap, swap mmu, jump > > Since IPC on L4-like kernels usually allows capability/rights > delegation, it is not quite as simple, but when I look at NOVA's IPC > path[1] it roughly fits your description, even with some form of > migrating threads. Check out the original paper[2] and another paper > that describes the design of the IPC system in more detail[3]. > > That being said, in practice IPC performance is not as important as it > may initially seem. My initial goal is indeed to eliminate kernel scheduling and measure that win; it happens to be the case that the user-land architecture for that is exactly what I didn’t finish in my prototype, but now have, and so the IPC wins of yester-decade again come to mind. Minimal IPC times are a desirable side-effect for many reasons. And thank you for the references!! There is so much to read its great to start with well-regarded work! Blaine > > Julian > > [1] https://github.com/udosteinberg/NOVA/blob/master/src/syscall.cpp > Starts at sys_call. > > [2] https://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/papers_ps/steinberg_eurosys2010.pdf > [3] > https://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/papers_ps/ospert2010_steinberg_boettcher_kauer.pdf > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) > > iEYEARECAAYFAlMBSPgACgkQ2EtjUdW3H9mW5ACeMA7gf1iyy7oXTbLR92q4yeMA > bf4AnA2gpk+JkxANRJ0bIB11aMOGf9K8 > =YKo4 > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > _______________________________________________ > l4-hackers mailing list > [email protected] > http://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/mailman/listinfo/l4-hackers _______________________________________________ l4-hackers mailing list [email protected] http://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/mailman/listinfo/l4-hackers
