Re: FreeBSD vs. OSX
From: Eric Masson (emss_at_free.fr)
Date: 12/24/03
- Next message: Andreas Wenzel: "Mounting SMB share on startup"
- Previous message: pat: "Re: FreeBSD vs. OSX"
- In reply to: pat: "Re: FreeBSD vs. OSX"
- Next in thread: jpd: "Re: FreeBSD vs. OSX"
- Reply: jpd: "Re: FreeBSD vs. OSX"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 14:47:49 +0100
>>>>> "pat" == pat <patpro@boleskine.patpro.net> writes:
pat> As far as I know, it can. It's a piece of code loaded by the
pat> kernel, in the kernel space. If the driver goes wild, it can panic
pat> the kernel. Any userland soft would get killed by the kernel, but
pat> drivers are not userland.
You're right, some oses solve this issue by placing drivers in userland
and just keeping basic functions in kernel.
Drivers (hardware, filesystems, protocols) can then be debugged with
userland tools and won't crash the whole system if they fail.
Take a look at the hurd or Mach for further information, FreeBSD has
available patches that help running the ip stack in userland, iirc Dfly
will investigate in this area for filesystems.
Eric Masson
-- Je viens d'adopter une limace (elle s'appele "Chompie"), et j'ai trouve des infos sur un site qui n'a pas ete mis a jour depuis des siecles! Meme si l'auteur ne s'y interesse plus, le site garde tout son interet. -+- P in : <http://www.le-gnu.net> - L'ęre des limaces média -+-
- Next message: Andreas Wenzel: "Mounting SMB share on startup"
- Previous message: pat: "Re: FreeBSD vs. OSX"
- In reply to: pat: "Re: FreeBSD vs. OSX"
- Next in thread: jpd: "Re: FreeBSD vs. OSX"
- Reply: jpd: "Re: FreeBSD vs. OSX"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|