Subject: re: emulation initialization
To: Jaromir Dolecek <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: matthew green <email@example.com>
Date: 12/26/2002 20:22:37
> # On Sun, 22 Dec 2002, Jaromir Dolecek wrote:
> # I don't see general need need for emulation 'init' function. Exactly
> # one emulation can take advantage of it, and even the one runs
> # perfectly fine the current way.
> At the moment this may be true, sure. But is this forward-thinking
> at all?
less bloat in generic code == good
Mach emulation doesn't need to adjust any OS parameters or structures,
so it doesn't need to run it's initialization on boot. It's perfectly
fine to execute the stuff when first Mach process is executed, IMHO.
So, we have one emulation which would take cosmetic advantage of such
thing (e_init called on boot), and no emulation which would need
it to work properly. I don't think it would be appropriate to add
the framework in this situation.
additionally, if mach_init() or whatever it's called is called
at boot time, it will allocate it's resources _always_ even for
people who never use it. think of all the netbsd/i386 users that
will affect when COMPAT_MACH is enabled in GENERIC? :-)
of course, this wouldn't be an issue with really good emul LKM's :-)