From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262374AbVGGAX3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Jul 2005 20:23:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262126AbVGFUDf (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Jul 2005 16:03:35 -0400 Received: from inti.inf.utfsm.cl ([200.1.21.155]:41102 "EHLO inti.inf.utfsm.cl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262354AbVGFRgV (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Jul 2005 13:36:21 -0400 Message-Id: <200507061730.j66HUZ8R015013@laptop11.inf.utfsm.cl> To: Hans Reiser cc: Martin Waitz , Jonathan Briggs , Ross Biro , Hubert Chan , Horst von Brand , Kyle Moffett , David Masover , Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, Lincoln Dale , Gregory Maxwell , Jeff Garzik , Christoph Hellwig , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ReiserFS List Subject: Re: reiser4 plugins In-Reply-To: Message from Hans Reiser of "Wed, 06 Jul 2005 02:02:16 MST." <42CB9E18.8080206@namesys.com> X-Mailer: MH-E 7.4.2; nmh 1.1; XEmacs 21.4 (patch 17) Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2005 13:30:35 -0400 From: Horst von Brand X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0b5 (inti.inf.utfsm.cl [200.1.19.1]); Wed, 06 Jul 2005 13:30:39 -0400 (CLT) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hans Reiser wrote: [...] > I think the exokernel approach by Frans is a very interesting approach. > I wish I had the experience with it necessary to know if it was > effective. I do NOT take the position that name resolution should be in > the kernel. I DO take the position that it should be either in the > kernel or out of the kernel, and should constitute one cohesive and > coherent body of code. Right. > If someone talks Linus into trying the exokernel > approach, Are you nuts?! Such radical experiments do /not/ belong in the kernel on which millions of machines depend! Go and fork off a branch to play around with this, and if it does show real promise, you can then come back and try to integrate this into the official kernel. > I will be happy to educate myself to where I have an opinion > on whether that works. It is easy to see powerful advantages to the > exokernel approach: I wish I understood the security model for it, and I > wish I was sure that name resolution would not require too many context > switches as one fetches each storage component required by a name > resolution. Exactly the kinds of questions that have to get solid answers before any experimental patches can get off the ground. -- Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513