From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 6 01:39:26 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92AD216A4CE for ; Sun, 6 Feb 2005 01:39:24 +0000 (GMT) Received: from rwcrmhc12.comcast.net (rwcrmhc12.comcast.net [216.148.227.85]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4645E43D3F for ; Sun, 6 Feb 2005 01:39:22 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from quantescape@comcast.net) Received: from [192.168.1.100] (pcp09943044pcs.hyatsv01.md.comcast.net[69.143.229.85]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc12) with SMTP id <20050206013921014003f313e>; Sun, 6 Feb 2005 01:39:21 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619.2) To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Message-Id: <2fe871a43eb6fc1133f7b4b24f0ec189@comcast.net> From: Nicholas Ink Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2005 20:39:21 -0500 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.619.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.1 Subject: FreeBSD: Monolithic Kernel or Microkernel? X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2005 01:39:26 -0000 Hi. I've heard conflicting reports about the true nature of FreeBSD's kernel and whether it is a microkernel or a monolithic kernel. Does anybody know which it definitively is and where on the FreeBSD website I can find out more about this topic? Thanks, Nicholas Ink From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 6 01:42:09 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEA8716A4CE for ; Sun, 6 Feb 2005 01:42:09 +0000 (GMT) Received: from blackwater.lemis.com (wantadilla.lemis.com [192.109.197.135]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E8C643D31 for ; Sun, 6 Feb 2005 01:42:08 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from grog@lemis.com) Received: by blackwater.lemis.com (Postfix, from userid 1004) id C5B7785684; Sun, 6 Feb 2005 12:12:05 +1030 (CST) Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2005 12:12:05 +1030 From: Greg 'groggy' Lehey To: Nicholas Ink Message-ID: <20050206014205.GC49637@wantadilla.lemis.com> References: <2fe871a43eb6fc1133f7b4b24f0ec189@comcast.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="69pVuxX8awAiJ7fD" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2fe871a43eb6fc1133f7b4b24f0ec189@comcast.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Organization: The FreeBSD Project Phone: +61-8-8388-8286 Fax: +61-8-8388-8725 Mobile: +61-418-838-708 WWW-Home-Page: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ X-PGP-Fingerprint: 9A1B 8202 BCCE B846 F92F 09AC 22E6 F290 507A 4223 cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD: Monolithic Kernel or Microkernel? X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2005 01:42:09 -0000 --69pVuxX8awAiJ7fD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Saturday, 5 February 2005 at 20:39:21 -0500, Nicholas Ink wrote: > Hi. > I've heard conflicting reports about the true nature of FreeBSD's > kernel and whether it is a microkernel or a monolithic kernel. Does > anybody know which it definitively is It's monolithic. It is possible to add separate modules ("kernel loadable modules"), but that doesn't change the overall structure. > and where on the FreeBSD website I can find out more about this > topic? It's possible that that is missing. I certainly can't point to anything there. Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers. --69pVuxX8awAiJ7fD Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFCBXXtIubykFB6QiMRAp4PAJ4zGx7QjSbNaRtAQdGPiS2oCtxw7QCaA4z6 X4k80GLv7PGfuuRgYz6fT8M= =wXAD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --69pVuxX8awAiJ7fD-- From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 8 01:19:17 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8C0D16A4CE for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2005 01:19:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from web30203.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web30203.mail.mud.yahoo.com [68.142.200.86]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8531D43D49 for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2005 01:19:17 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from granted14@yahoo.com) Received: (qmail 56326 invoked by uid 60001); 8 Feb 2005 01:19:17 -0000 Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=lavxe4jAhDvlgoG0r/6SB0ZXRoOA80FPBRywGun3D7MS1AX6nVd/ytbcIBYM2Y4Gb1AK5RrOLyTp4HTOexiUKqaiysHXgE//Y0uNf1VMVSgu2LxATmwtQK3SzPbhqJ8orCVerB8Xuqr42/+9A+BVG8VKhxAsQVtcTVhqzTF/PnU= ; Message-ID: <20050208011917.56324.qmail@web30203.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Received: from [206.167.24.15] by web30203.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 20:19:17 EST Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 20:19:17 -0500 (EST) From: Etienne Robillard To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: question about ucontext_t and friends X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 01:19:18 -0000 Hi, I have a c++ application implementing a user-level hardware abstraction (L4 ­µ-kernel in user-mode linux) bu I am missing a few arch backbones. Afaiu, the application must find some ways to manipulate registers in user-context, after having the request traced by ptrace(2). So far, interfaces are prototyped in similar manners: ... kernel_entry( *context, ... ) Where *context is a pointer to a `struct ucontext', but I suspect its because the relevant ucontext_t type wasnt available for some reasons. Question 1: Concerning the 'missing members' in ucontext_t, may I suspect that conformant applications needs not to alter things in uc_mcontext (machine context) ?? [1] The docs are saying that: "The ucontext_t type that ucp points to defines the user context and includes the contents of the calling thread's machine registers, the signal mask, and the current execution stack." Therefore this is almost okay but doesnt work on freebsd as-is: // save it to regs.foo = context->uc_mcontext.gregs[REG_FOO] TIA -erob 1. http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/getcontext.html ===== JabberID: incidah (at) njs (dot) netlab (dot) cz -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iD8DBQBBvMMiwi4xwWEgKqERAsAAAJ0anaSvffwamXLuJnIwH5GRsTjM1wCdGHpa BqtF2n/eBawNURrU1t/9FDA= =tuy/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca