> how do u explain pcmcia modules, that work in "user
> space"? and what about v4l drivers that ALSO work in
> user space? how do u explain the concept of LKM at
> all? u just cant say that LKM doesn't figure in the
Well, if you say that just having LKM makes a kernel architecture
somewhat of a microkernel arch then why not count plain old dos and win3.1
also as microkernels? They also had LKM. And I know of several boxes,
embedded devices that use the plain old M$ dog as base system, w/o a
display interface or keyboard interface, but with a dos extender (like
phar-lap) to let them access more ram.
> but that was in reference to Minix. I think Linux
> definately has a lil' bit of micro kernel arch, as
> many ppl. are finding it a nice os for embedded
Suitability to embedded systems doesn't qualify a kernel to be a
microkernel. That way one can claim that VxWorks and pSOS and uCOS and
eCOS and all those nifty embedded OSes are microkernel arch. They are not.
They are all classical monolithic kernels.
> is a micro kernel altogether, but what i'm trying to
> say is that it isn't totally a monolithic arch. either
IMHO what distinguishes a microkernel architecture is when you
have the ability to have *whole* filesystems, page-fault (or any other
fault) handlers, and stuff like that to be runnable as a user space
daemon, no more different than any other application prog, except for
privileges/access permissions.
> corner. Just tell me how many people compile in EVERY
> driver linux provides, and use a monolithic kernel. I
I say again, please don't confuse ability to have LKMs with a
microkernel arch.
> topic doesn't fit in this list and belongs to LIG, but
> i am not subscribed there, and i would appreciate it
> sorry if i sounded a bit raw out there, no offense.
Same here :->.
Regards,
Kedar.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For more information on the LIH mailing list see:
http://lists.linux-india.org/lists/LIH
