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

Re: Linux drivers in gnumach

> Perhaps.  I'm looking at both, but working more on gnumach really.  If
> everyone keeps nudging us to work on oskit so much, why does anyone bother
> working on gnumach?  Just curious...

There has been almost no hacking done on gnumach since I did oskit-mach.
Your porting efforts are the first time lately anyone has been serious
about microkernel hacking.

> Also, today I was adding the Elf64 stuff to the various elf.h headers in
> gnumach.  I was wondering why the current structure was used (defining the
> types of Elf??_* directly in the machine-specific elf.h file) rather than
> defining them like __u16 Elf??_* in the main elf.h and just typedef'ing
> __u16 (eg) in a machine-specific types header?  Just curious again since
> it would save a ton of duplication of effort if another port needed
> something like Elf128.

That's just historical cruft.  Another reason to use oskit instead! ;=)

> Gnumach's seperation is not bad.  There are some things (see above) that
> seem odd, but in general, it seems fairly easy to figure out what's
> arch-specific.  I'll have to take another look at oskit to see how good
> they've got things sorted out.

oskit runs on two platforms now (i386 and strongarm), and others outside
the Utah group are working on other ports.  That says something.

> I believe we mailed alanau, but got no responce as of yet.  I'm a bit
> disappointed that we couldn't find more info on that port since
> modernising that seems like the way to go.

I too am disappointed.  I haven't gotten any helpful response from the Flux
group either (and I used to work there).  I think the folks are just too
busy with others things (they are working on oskit, just not on ports).

> True, but so far, the only ones that seem interested in seeing OSKit
> getting ported to Alpha are people without Alphas (I'm presuming they want
> it for what I call "the coolness factor").  I haven't heard of any more 
> serious offers to assist with OSKit than I have wrt gnumach, so it still
> looks like the workload would be the same.

Have you posted to the oskit-users list looking for interested people?

> Ok, thanks.  We just got the old code checked into our seperate CVS tree
> (we wanted to do this until we get everying integrated better into a
> structure that was uniform with the rest of gnumach).  I'm now fixing up
> header files and will move on to the hard-core stuff soon (fingers
> crossed).

I hope you will concentrate first on the core chip support, i.e. pmap et
al.  That is the stuff that still needs to be specifically done for gnumach
on Alpha even if you can get drivers and such from oskit.

Reply to: