Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Rewrite Kernel | From | Redeeman <> | Date | Wed, 07 Apr 2004 19:21:30 +0200 |
| |
On Wed, 2004-04-07 at 17:05, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote: > Guys, gals, > > you are all missing the point. > > It is obvious that what we really need is a hand-optimized in-kernel > core LISP machine written in >i386 assembly, then we need to port the > rest of the kernel to run as LISP bytecode on top of that in ring1 (in > particular the security policies). > > Of course, important privileged user-space such as glibc should be > ported to this highly efficient non-recursive LISP machine too for > efficiency and run on ring 2 for speed and security. > > As a further benefit, this could provide us with a stable kernel binary > ABI via the LISP interfaces to which we could dynamically translate the > existing kernel modules on load, for which nvidia and the binary-only > Inifiband stack seem perfect candidates to secure industry buyin.
this is a good idea, but i doubt that anyone would dare to do that :D > > Oh, and of course this project needs to be managed via BitKeeper. > > > Sincerely, > Lars Marowsky-Brée <lmb@suse.de> -- Regards, Redeeman redeeman@metanurb.dk
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |