Martin <martin.kelly4000%gmail.com@localhost> writes: > Lets take for example the idea of running two different kernels for NetBSD > the generic mono kernel and a microkernel. With the current toolchain and > the RUMP anykernel the ability to transfer software development between the > two wouldn't be much harder than transferring it between different > platforms (i.e. sparc64 to amd64). What i am suggesting is basically using > the microkernel design as development platform for NetBSD software & tools, > lets take the development of KMS and GEOS drivers for the running graphic > acceleration and in the use of the nouveau video drivers. Most know that by > running drivers in userspace they are easier to debug and develop for > because won't cause huge problems if some goes wrong as it doesn't shut > down the whole system. Which for the development of the GEOS and KMS tools > is big. > > While it all comes down to manpower the only real big development is > actually making the microkernel, which in all honesty with RUMP wouldn't be > anywhere near as complex or difficult as what Minix had to do between > version 2 and 3. You can certainly make incremental progress towards that. The big challenge will be detangling the kernel so that smaller chunks can be in separate rump libraries. If the real goal is debugging a driver, then doing enough to rumpify that driver may be a better approach than entirely implementing the general microkernel approach first.
Description: PGP signature