[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55118277.5070909@nod.at>
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 16:27:51 +0100
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To: Hajime Tazaki <tazaki@....wide.ad.jp>
CC: linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, arnd@...db.de, corbet@....net,
cl@...ux.com, penberg@...nel.org, rientjes@...gle.com,
iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, jdike@...toit.com,
rusty@...tcorp.com.au, mathieu.lacage@...il.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/11] an introduction of library operating system
for Linux (LibOS)
Am 24.03.2015 um 16:24 schrieb Hajime Tazaki:
> I was thinking that such 'architectural' differences in core
> idea (like system call handling, execution model, process
> context design, etc) is better to have a different architecture
> even if some part of the code is similar.
>
> Isn't it also the same to the other 'hardware-dependent'
> architectures' case like between arm and arm64 ?
>
> of course I'm also happy to share the code between us,
> especially _pure_ userspace part like (virtual) NIC with
> tap or pcap because we also need that part, but we kept such
> code at an external codebase (i.e., linux-libos-tools).
I'd say you should try hard to re-use/integrate your work in arch/um.
With um we already have an architecture which targets userspace,
having two needs a very good justification.
Thanks,
//richard
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists