To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
There has been talk in nanokernels of making the scheduler user-space to so that different apps could use different schedulers. For example there could be problems with not being MP-safe so you'd want to have finer control, or some legacy code that makes certain exceptions, or a myriad of other reasons.
The timer has to be in the kernel. How else would the scheduler function?
Cooperatively? Don't laugh. That's an option and if you can plug-in various schedulers it could be useful, especially for something like Wine emulating Windows 3.11, or if you have some real time (RT) tasks and non-RT. Where you could put the on-RT scheduler as a process with the RT-scheduler.
I don't recall where I read this, but I believe it was in some paper on a branch of the L4 project.




Member since:
2006-04-16
The timer has to be in the kernel. How else would the scheduler function?
:D