Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 26 Mar 1996 18:38:57 -0500 (EST)
From:      "John S. Dyson" <toor@dyson.iquest.net>
To:        davidg@Root.COM
Cc:        mikebo@tellabs.com, hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: OSF Micro Kernel for Linux/FreeBSD/etc (fwd)
Message-ID:  <199603262338.SAA20029@dyson.iquest.net>
In-Reply-To: <199603261944.LAA09127@Root.COM> from "David Greenman" at Mar 26, 96 11:44:00 am

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> 
> >FreeBSD hackers -
> >I received a copy of this from a friend who does a lot of PowerPC work.
> >Since I've seen nothing about this on the FreeBSD lists as yet, I thought
> >some of you might like to know about this new frontier. The article
> >mentions FreeBSD, but perhaps the discussion is more germane to NetBSD.
> >
> >Is the FreeBSD core team open to the idea of possibly moving to a Mach
> >3.0 micro-kernel, or is there significant sentimental attachment to
> >the traditional, monolithic BSD kernel?
> 
>    No, we're not open to the idea.
> 
I want to chime in (essentially agreeing with David Greenman).  The reason is
that the monolithic kernel has some advantages that the Mach
microkernel doesn't and vice versa.  My view is that FreeBSD is eventually
meant to be a high performance, multi-processor, multi-platform OS.  Right now
we are working primarily on performance with multi-processor and multi-platform
issues being worked also.  Eventually, more of us will be working more
aggressively on multi-processor support and multi-platform.  MACH based
OSes sometimes have serious problems with performance (esp under memory
loading conditions.)  MACH is interesting because of it's ability to emulate
other OSes (of course FreeBSD can do so in a different way).

I guess what I am trying to say is that the disadvantages appear to outweigh
the advantages.  I think that the work that has been done in Lites, etc is
very interesting and a valuable, interesting alternative, but FreeBSD is
very high performance and it would take quite a bit of time working on MACH to
make it perform as well as FreeBSD.

The reason is not sentiment, but simply being practical.  I have been intrigued
by MACH for a long time, but it doesn't really help do the U**X thing very
much...

John




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199603262338.SAA20029>