Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"The World's Most Highly-Assured OS" Kernel Open-Sourced

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    wow, i'm badly impressed about how many people here fail badly on the concept of proof. it's like talking to 5 years old children.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
      There's that too, even Minix3 which is the most advanced of the 3 primary FOSS microkernel (minix, genode, helenOS) projects can't really be run on bear metal at this point. Personally I expect Dragonfly BSD to finish turning into a microkernel before those 3 get themselves in shape to try to compete.
      I haven't mucked around with helenos but I've certainly ran MINIX and Genode on bare metal. Maybe "bear" metal is different?

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by kaprikawn View Post
        Thanks, wow that's quite something. A quick google search shows the Linux kernel was over 15million lines of code in 2011. I suppose it's a lot easier to keep code secure when there's so few moving parts.

        For limited use cases I'm sure this would be good to use. Though with so few lines of code I'm assuming there's no hardware drivers. Imagine getting wi-fi up-and-running using this!
        Most wifi drivers are more than 7500 lines of code by themselves.... ath10k is over 28000.
        Wait... 7500 only? Really? There's not a "0" or 2 missing from that?

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
          Most wifi drivers are more than 7500 lines of code by themselves.... ath10k is over 28000.
          Wait... 7500 only? Really? There's not a "0" or 2 missing from that?
          Yep. I was right, there was a 0 missing.
          $ git ls-files | xargs cat | wc -l
          82122

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
            Yep. I was right, there was a 0 missing.
            $ git ls-files | xargs cat | wc -l
            82122
            7500 refers to only the lines of code that are a part of the microkernel.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by jayrulez View Post
              Correlation is not causation. There are more monolithic kernel projects that failed to success in their target markets that microkernels. Noone is pushing any microkernel for desktop or server markets. Despite many pushing Linux as a desktop OS, it has yet to make any inroads on the desktop. Does that make Linux or monolithic kernels bad for the desktop? I don't think so. Correlation is not causation.
              Again, micro-kernels built around the notion that monolithic kernels are inherently unstable *by design*.
              In-order to solve this inherent design issue, micro-kernels pay a hefty price when it comes to latency and complexity.
              Given the fact that *all* 5/9s servers in the world use monolithic kernels more or less proves that monolithic kernels are just as stable as micro-kernels.

              - Gilboa
              DEV: Intel S2600C0, 2xE52658V2, 32GB, 4x2TB + 2x3TB, GTX780, F21/x86_64, Dell U2711.
              SRV: Intel S5520SC, 2xX5680, 36GB, 4x2TB, GTX550, F21/x86_64, Dell U2412..
              BACK: Tyan Tempest i5400XT, 2xE5335, 8GB, 3x1.5TB, 9800GTX, F21/x86-64.
              LAP: ASUS N56VJ, i7-3630QM, 16GB, 1TB, 635M, F21/x86_64.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
                Basically this ^, plus all of the FOSS gen2 microkernel OSes are in their infancy when compared to the monolithic ones. L4/Pistachio was released in 2001, Minix 3 was 2005, Genode in 2008, HelenOS AFAICT started in 2009.
                Just fyi, Genode is an OS, and can use various kernels (including Linux).

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by gilboa View Post
                  Again, micro-kernels built around the notion that monolithic kernels are inherently unstable *by design*.
                  In-order to solve this inherent design issue, micro-kernels pay a hefty price when it comes to latency and complexity.
                  Given the fact that *all* 5/9s servers in the world use monolithic kernels more or less proves that monolithic kernels are just as stable as micro-kernels.

                  - Gilboa
                  LOL. It only tells that servers are not seen as life- and safety-critical systems. Ever seen Linux running medical, nuclear, space or military devices? Think of SIL 3 and 4. They are dominated by microkernels.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by log0 View Post
                    LOL. It only tells that servers are not seen as life- and safety-critical systems. Ever seen Linux running medical, nuclear, space or military devices? Think of SIL 3 and 4. They are dominated by microkernels.
                    Sure, 5-9's servers are not seen as life critical servers. Large ITs (E.g. banks, insurance companies, stock-exchanges, etc) pay 50-300K$ a server (loaded with RAS features) simply because the extra cash is burning a hole in their pocket.
                    Troll much?

                    (EDIT: Oh, and while you are at it, check the dictionary for the definition of "just-as-stable").
                    Last edited by gilboa; 08-03-2014, 07:54 AM.
                    DEV: Intel S2600C0, 2xE52658V2, 32GB, 4x2TB + 2x3TB, GTX780, F21/x86_64, Dell U2711.
                    SRV: Intel S5520SC, 2xX5680, 36GB, 4x2TB, GTX550, F21/x86_64, Dell U2412..
                    BACK: Tyan Tempest i5400XT, 2xE5335, 8GB, 3x1.5TB, 9800GTX, F21/x86-64.
                    LAP: ASUS N56VJ, i7-3630QM, 16GB, 1TB, 635M, F21/x86_64.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by gilboa View Post
                      Sure, 5-9's servers are not seen as life critical servers. Large ITs (E.g. banks, insurance companies, stock-exchanges, etc) pay 50-300K$ a server (loaded with RAS features) simply because the extra cash is burning a hole in their pocket.
                      Troll much?

                      (EDIT: Oh, and while you are at it, check the dictionary for the definition of "just-as-stable").
                      Please read my previous reply.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by gilboa View Post
                        Sure, 5-9's servers are not seen as life critical servers. Large ITs (E.g. banks, insurance companies, stock-exchanges, etc) pay 50-300K$ a server (loaded with RAS features) simply because the extra cash is burning a hole in their pocket.
                        Troll much?
                        Nah, they pay a lot because businesses are greedy assholes that know they can corner the market so they can charge a lot. There's a reason they do "lowest-bidder" auctions for these things. That, and if they (the bidder) fuck anything up they're probably going to be sued a butt-load and have to fix it, too.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by jayrulez View Post
                          Please read my previous reply.
                          I must admit that I don't see the relevance.
                          Common wisdom ties the number of bugs in code to the total number of code lines - which in my view is utter bullshit, as it fails to take into account the complexity of the code (E.g. by forcing drivers to use complex IPC to move data around instead of simply yanking data out of a PCI device directly into a user-space buffer).
                          Keep in mind that I currently maintain a ~0.5M LOC out of tree kernel module(s) so I may know what I'm talking about.

                          In the end, the argument between monolithic and micro-kernels started when I was writing DOS code for a living, and will continue when I retire.
                          Whether or not micro-kernels have a huge theoretical advantage as more or less irrelevant when most of the big-iron Linux servers I worked with have uptime measured in years.


                          Nobu,

                          You comment is childish. Please list the manufacturer and model of all 1+ M$ servers you used, and feel free to add why you think they sucked.
                          Last edited by gilboa; 08-04-2014, 03:00 AM.
                          DEV: Intel S2600C0, 2xE52658V2, 32GB, 4x2TB + 2x3TB, GTX780, F21/x86_64, Dell U2711.
                          SRV: Intel S5520SC, 2xX5680, 36GB, 4x2TB, GTX550, F21/x86_64, Dell U2412..
                          BACK: Tyan Tempest i5400XT, 2xE5335, 8GB, 3x1.5TB, 9800GTX, F21/x86-64.
                          LAP: ASUS N56VJ, i7-3630QM, 16GB, 1TB, 635M, F21/x86_64.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by log0 View Post
                            LOL. It only tells that servers are not seen as life- and safety-critical systems. Ever seen Linux running medical, nuclear, space or military devices? Think of SIL 3 and 4. They are dominated by microkernels.
                            You mean like U.S. Naval vessels (including nuclear submarines), the Japanese bullet train system, air traffic control systems, road traffic management, docking in the international space station, and essentially all the world's major stock markets? Because all of these use Linux.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by gilboa View Post
                              Nobu,

                              You comment is childish. Please list the manufacturer and model of all 1+ M$ servers you used, and feel free to add why you think they sucked.
                              And it wasn't childish for you to say they just spend lots of money because it's burning a hole in their pockets? Or was there some sarcasm in there that I just failed to see?

                              Either way, I can't see how what I said has anything to do with Microsoft.
                              ...or is that supposed to be $1M+? I don't even know anymore.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Nobu View Post
                                And it wasn't childish for you to say they just spend lots of money because it's burning a hole in their pockets? Or was there some sarcasm in there that I just failed to see?

                                Either way, I can't see how what I said has anything to do with Microsoft.
                                ...or is that supposed to be $1M+? I don't even know anymore.
                                What the hell are you talking about. Seriously! Are you on drugs? Where did you see anything about Microsoft?

                                For the sake of being nice (for God knows what reason) let me reiterate my point.
                                Please take the time to read it *slowly*.

                                0. Of-course I was being sarcastic!
                                1. 1+M$ means 1 million USD or above.
                                2. Both Unix and Linux are used in big-iron servers.
                                3. Big iron means very expensive servers that are built to last anything short of a Nuclear attack.
                                4. Such servers include RAS (Reliability, availability and serviceability) features such as on-line CPU (!), memory, disk, expansion cards and power supply replacement, memory mirroring, complex RAID schemes, etc.
                                5. 5-9s means 99.999% uptime or 5 1/2 minutes of downtime *per* year.

                                Now, my point is that given the fact that monolithic kernels such as Linux, Solaris and AIX are capable of maintaining 99.999% uptime in *complex* environments, it is no longer possible to claim that monolithic kernels are unstable by design.
                                Quite the opposite, micro-kernels are currently limited to the fairly simple embedded market and have yet to prove themselves in complex deployments.

                                - Gilboa
                                Last edited by gilboa; 08-04-2014, 08:21 AM.
                                DEV: Intel S2600C0, 2xE52658V2, 32GB, 4x2TB + 2x3TB, GTX780, F21/x86_64, Dell U2711.
                                SRV: Intel S5520SC, 2xX5680, 36GB, 4x2TB, GTX550, F21/x86_64, Dell U2412..
                                BACK: Tyan Tempest i5400XT, 2xE5335, 8GB, 3x1.5TB, 9800GTX, F21/x86-64.
                                LAP: ASUS N56VJ, i7-3630QM, 16GB, 1TB, 635M, F21/x86_64.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X