Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 10th Jul 2011 18:50 UTC, submitted by moondevil
Microsoft "The Microsoft and ETH Zurich research teams have published the source code of Barrelfish, a multikernel operating system for the multicore heterogeneous hardware of the future. Today's operating systems have been adapted to work on multiprocessor and multicore hardware, but they were not initially designed with multicore in mind, and they are not ready for heterogeneous hardware with hundreds of cores that is to come in the following ten years. The main problem is the concept of shared-memory and the contention arising from accessing the same data protected by locks. This is the problem that Barrelfish wants to address."
Thread beginning with comment 480278
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Worthwhile?
by AndrewZ on Mon 11th Jul 2011 16:08 UTC in reply to "Worthwhile?"
AndrewZ
Member since:
2005-11-15

Plan9 was designed as a distributed system, meant to replace unix. BeOS was designed as a GUI workstation meant to replace MacOS classic. Barrelfish is a research OS focusing on new forms of multicore.


I have to admit that I have not yet taken time to read about Barrelfish. I expect to do so. I have read a bit about Plan 9. To simply say that Plan 9 was written as a replacement for UNIX is a big understatement. The Plan 9 kernel could distribute its processing across networked computers dynamically. This is pretty amazing. Plan 9 itself is based on some astounding design principles. I would not be surprised if some of those principle are resurrected in a future OS.

Haiku has an interesting feature - you can use the Pulse demo to dynamically turn on and off CPU cores. I am not sure I have seen this on other OSs outside the BIOS. Maybe someone else can comment on this.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Worthwhile?
by anevilyak on Mon 11th Jul 2011 16:18 in reply to "RE: Worthwhile?"
anevilyak Member since:
2005-09-14


Haiku has an interesting feature - you can use the Pulse demo to dynamically turn on and off CPU cores. I am not sure I have seen this on other OSs outside the BIOS. Maybe someone else can comment on this.


That feature would be trivially doable on just about any OS, the way it works in BeOS/Haiku isn't by actually physically disabling the CPU, it simply tells the scheduler to not schedule anything other than the idle thread on it (until one marks that CPU as enabled again in Pulse or ProcessController) ; the CPU is still very much active.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Worthwhile?
by AndrewZ on Mon 11th Jul 2011 16:43 in reply to "RE[2]: Worthwhile?"
AndrewZ Member since:
2005-11-15

That feature would be trivially doable on just about any OS, the way it works in BeOS/Haiku isn't by actually physically disabling the CPU, it simply tells the scheduler to not schedule anything other than the idle thread on it (until one marks that CPU as enabled again in Pulse or ProcessController) ; the CPU is still very much active.


Thanks for correcting my misconception, interesting to know. If you were going to trivially code that in Windows, what would the code look like? Just curious.

Edited 2011-07-11 16:44 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Worthwhile?
by jonas.kirilla on Mon 11th Jul 2011 21:57 in reply to "RE: Worthwhile?"
jonas.kirilla Member since:
2005-07-11

Plan9 was created by people that had been part in creating Unix. They were unsatisfied with how unix developed as it grew addititional features, e.g. networked filesystems, new forms of interprocess-communication, etc, and set out to design something better. So of course its not a simple clone or replica of unix. It was meant to replace unix - by being superior.

The keyword here is 'distributed', which implies the feature you mention. Plan9 was, unlike unix, designed with these things in mind and its creators indeed meant for it to replace Unix. Sadly that didn't happen.

Reply Parent Score: 2