Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 9th May 2006 21:25 UTC, submitted by luzr
OSNews, Generic OSes Torvalds has indeed chimed in on the micro vs. monolithic kernel debate. Going all 1992, he says: "The whole 'microkernels are simpler' argument is just bull, and it is clearly shown to be bull by the fact that whenever you compare the speed of development of a microkernel and a traditional kernel, the traditional kernel wins. The whole argument that microkernels are somehow 'more secure' or 'more stable' is also total crap. The fact that each individual piece is simple and secure does not make the aggregate either simple or secure. And the argument that you can 'just reload' a failed service and not take the whole system down is equally flawed." My take: While I am not qualified to reply to Linus, there is one thing I want to say: just because it is difficult to program, does not make it the worse design.
Thread beginning with comment 123060
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
modularity
by viton on Wed 10th May 2006 16:47 UTC in reply to "RE: Abstraction"
viton
Member since:
2005-08-09

Monolithic kernels are just as modular as microkernels.
Ok, Can i use dynamically loadable 2.14 driver on 2.16 kernel?

http://www.linux-ntfs.org/content/view/187/
2.6.16-1.2111_FC5
2.6.16-1.2107_FC5
2.6.16-1.2096_FC5
2.6.16-1.2080_FC5
2.6.15-1.2054_FC5
These guys have a compiled driver for every kernel revision.
This is an absolute nonsense.
Doesn't it make sense to have only latest version if you said what linux is modular?

AmigaOs inspired OS-es are truly modular and have a lighting fast message passing. Of course it lacks memory protection, but there are 3 ways: 64bit protection domains or the "Singularity" approarch with safe languages or both at the same time.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: modularity
by gilboa on Wed 10th May 2006 20:43 in reply to "modularity"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

I'd suggest you do some reading about Linux' CONFIG_MODVERSIONS and what it means before writing such complete nonsense.

"7. Module versioning

Module versioning is enabled by the CONFIG_MODVERSIONS tag.

Module versioning is used as a simple ABI consistency check. The Module
versioning creates a CRC value of the full prototype for an exported symbol and
when a module is loaded/used then the CRC values contained in the kernel are
compared with similar values in the module. If they are not equal then the kernel refuses to load the module.
"

Fedora is compiled with CONFIG_MODVERSION=y by default, forcing all external modules to be recompiled to match the -exact- kernel version used.

G.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: modularity
by gilboa on Wed 10th May 2006 20:53 in reply to "modularity"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

Ok, Can i use dynamically loadable 2.14 driver on 2.16 kernel?

A. This has nothing to do with Micro vs. Monolithic kernel debate; if anything, it shows you lack of understanding what debate is all about.
B. The reason you won't be able to load 2.4 drivers on a 2.6 kernel is simple: ABI changes. If micro-kernel X has changed its kernel-land to user-land interface between version 1.0 to version 2.0, a 1.0 driver will be just as incompatible as 2.4 drivers are today.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: modularity
by gilboa on Wed 10th May 2006 20:54 in reply to "RE: modularity"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

Eeek... Edit doesn't work. Sorry for the bold.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: modularity
by viton on Thu 11th May 2006 10:28 in reply to "RE: modularity"
viton Member since:
2005-08-09

A. This has nothing to do with Micro vs. Monolithic kernel debate
True microkernel OS is modular.
True monolithic OS is not modular. It is a tight, heavily tuned piece of code.
I didn't said i'm a linux expert. But i have little experience with fedora5 and gentoo. What i see from the user point of view is what linux modularity is a kind of hack.

B. The reason you won't be able to load 2.4 drivers on a 2.6 kernel is simple: ABI changes
Serious ABI change in not backward-compatible way is a mostly clinical issue. Probably they should do it in next "major" version, but not the "minor" version.
Well, i don't care how linux versions are called since this is not my OS of choice.
Sorry if i insulted your feelings or whatever =]

Reply Parent Score: 1