OSDev.org

The Place to Start for Operating System Developers
It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 1:05 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Systems Software Research is Irrelevant, by Rob Pike
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2014 10:45 pm 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2007 6:03 am
Posts: 734
Location: Perth, Western Australia
... if you're going to be sarcastic, please mark it as such.

Yes, x86 (and to a lesser extent ARM) are kinda crazy at the architecture level, but interrupts are not the example you should pick (interrupts are one of the best low-level features if you want any form of performance)

I do (however) kinda agree that we need to rethink platforms to get better multi-core performance, and that's the direction systems research should be looking (that and working on new languages that make multi-threading easier to get correct)

_________________
Kernel Development, It's the brain surgery of programming.
Acess2 OS (c) | Tifflin OS (rust) | mrustc - Rust compiler
Currently Working on: mrustc


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Systems Software Research is Irrelevant, by Rob Pike
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2014 10:56 pm 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 7:38 pm
Posts: 558
Geri wrote:
why the hell we even have interrupts?

Go write an operating system that can saturate both the PCIe and SATA3 buses while doing nothing but polling and still accept and process user input and draw 3D graphics at a framerate meeting or exceeding your monitor's refresh rate.

I will eat a leather hat if you can.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Systems Software Research is Irrelevant, by Rob Pike
PostPosted: Wed Dec 24, 2014 10:53 am 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 12:00 am
Posts: 8561
Location: At his keyboard!
Hi,

thepowersgang wrote:
... if you're going to be sarcastic, please mark it as such.

Yes, x86 (and to a lesser extent ARM) are kinda crazy at the architecture level, but interrupts are not the example you should pick (interrupts are one of the best low-level features if you want any form of performance)

I do (however) kinda agree that we need to rethink platforms to get better multi-core performance, and that's the direction systems research should be looking (that and working on new languages that make multi-threading easier to get correct)


I'm not too sure what Geri was thinking; however...

It actually would be nice to get rid of IRQs and replace them with "hardware messages"; where a hardware message interrupts the currently running code (just like an IRQ would have), but consists of a "sender ID" (to identify the device that sent the IRQ) and some sort of device specific "status dword" (to identify the reason why the device is requesting attention - so the driver can figure out what it needs to do before/without touching the device's registers).


Cheers,

Brendan

_________________
For all things; perfection is, and will always remain, impossible to achieve in practice. However; by striving for perfection we create things that are as perfect as practically possible. Let the pursuit of perfection be our guide.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group