[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Reviewing Hurd-on-L4 (and considering its future?)

From: Richard Braun
Subject: Re: Reviewing Hurd-on-L4 (and considering its future?)
Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 10:51:48 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)

On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 11:53:34PM +0200, Paul Boddie wrote:
> I read your blog post about architectural difficulties with Hurd-on-Mach, 
> which communicated a degree of frustration with the limitations of these 
> technologies. Do you have any insights into how L4 implementations more 
> recent 
> than Pistachio (which I think was the basis of the earlier hurd-l4 work) 
> might 
> address some of the difficulties experienced, and whether they offer any 
> remedies?

I don't think the problems we've experienced with Mach would translate to
an L4 based port, because they were really related to the kernel interface,
which most L4 implementations don't even provide, such as object
capabilities (I think OKL4 is the only one to do this) and high level
virtual memory operations such as paging for anonymous memory.

On a side note, I personally consider object capabilities a strong
requirement for a Hurd-like system.

Richard Braun

reply via email to

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