Re: Mach, a but choise ?
I remeber reading something that said there is a cache-related problem
since mach is a really fat micro-kernel.
There is a big chance that this doc came from L4 website ;-)
----- Original Message -----
> I do not think removing a few functions would make any kind of
> difference -- if they are that slow avoid using them. The reason the L4
> people claim that Mach is so slow is that it uses async ipc messages.
> What does that mean? I send a message to you. Inside the message, I
> send a reply port. After I send the message, I wait on the reply port
> until you send me the result. In L4 they have (only) synchronous
> messages based on your tid (thread id) so when you send a message, it
> is ``easier'' to optimize.