Hi,
> What i am sure is that since the kernel CURRENTLY has
> some architectural features of a micro-kernel, and
> most of them of a macro one, i think it should be
> called a "hybrid" kernel. I remember having read this
What features of a microkernel do you think are there in linux?
LKM? I don't think it can be said that LKMs is a characteristic feature of
microkernels.
LKMs don't have their own address space, they don't have a
active thread doing the work, they don't run in user mode.
Linux can be called a "modular" kernel, not a microkernel. If you
say ability to load LKMs is a microkernel speciality, then even solaris,
hp-ux and possibly aix (although I am not sure with aix) may be claimed to
have microkernel-like architectures.
> stuff... How do u think the Cobalt chaps found it easy
> to push Linux into their box? Lets see do them with
> amount of micro-kernel-ness in the Linux kernel, which
> makes this possible. AFAIK, there are some version's
> doze! ;-) I personally think that it is this small
That way, it can be claimed even more ligitimately for most of the
RTOSes. They do far more complex things that what cobalt has done.
And none of these RTOSes - VxWorks, Nucleus, pSOS, uCOS, eCOS -
are microkernel architectures. They can't afford to have the luxury of
having a "clean" arch at the cost of efficiency/speed.
Regards,
Kedar.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
LIH is all for free speech. But it was created for a purpose - to help
people discuss issues about installing and running Linux. If your
messages are counterproductive to this purpose, your privileges to
submit messages can and will be revoked.
