Linked by Hadrien Grasland on Sun 29th May 2011 09:42 UTC
OSNews, Generic OSes It's funny how trying to have a consistent system design makes you constantly jump from one area of the designed OS to another. I initially just tried to implement interrupt handling, and now I'm cleaning up the design of an RPC-based daemon model, which will be used to implement interrupt handlers, along with most other system services. Anyway, now that I get to something I'm personally satisfied with, I wanted to ask everyone who's interested to check that design and tell me if anything in it sounds like a bad idea to them in the short or long run. That's because this is a core part of this OS' design, and I'm really not interested in core design mistakes emerging in a few years if I can fix them now. Many thanks in advance.
Permalink for comment 474960
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by Kaj-de-Vos
by Neolander on Sun 29th May 2011 20:02 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Kaj-de-Vos"
Member since:

Well, this looks like the beginning of an answer, so if you allow me...

In RPC, you assume that the remote end has a procedure you can call. That's a big assumption.

At the core, we have this: daemon process wants to inform the kernel that there's a range of things which it can do for other processes. The procedure/function abstraction sounded like the simplest one around the "things which it can do" concept to me.

To make it work, you assume that the remote procedure is written in the same programming language. That's a huge implementation "detail".

Hmmm... Can you mention a modern, serious programming language (joke languages like BF don't count) that does not have the concepts of a function or a pointer ? Because once the concepts are there, dealing with the switch from one language to another during a call is just a matter of gory implementation magic.

Messaging has a long history, really. These lessons were already learned in AmigaOS, BeOS, Syllable and new messaging systems such as 0MQ. You can also ask yourself what the most successful remote protocol does. Is HTTP/HTML RPC based?

I'd prefer it if we didn't put the notions of long story and success in there. DOS has a long story, Windows is successful. Does it mean that these are examples which everyone in the OS development community would like to follow ?

Edited 2011-05-29 20:05 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1