[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: If QNX is successful, why NOT GNU Microkernels

From: Niels Möller
Subject: Re: If QNX is successful, why NOT GNU Microkernels
Date: 22 Jan 2004 09:49:26 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2

Olivier Galibert <> writes:

> Fixing it must be fun though, I'll have to look up the proposed
> solutions.  Comparing with the linux syscall speeds will be _tough_.

I think the cost of an L4 ipc between address spaces is on the order
of a few hundred cycles. Then there are the effects on caches etc, I
don't know any numbers but at least the L4 footprint is reaonably

> You'll notice btw that what I cite is not incompatible with a
> microkernel approach (well, the cache unification may be hard).  It's
> Mach itself I consider badly designed by today standards, not the
> microkernel concept per se.

We can all agree Mach is big and slow. That's no news.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]