Rik van Riel <H.H.vanRiel@phys.uu.nl> wrote:
>> Maybe I have not expressed my views very clearly. Very briefly, I would
>> rather see the kernel offer high level services like dynamic process
>> migration. It is not important which mechanism can simulate the other one.
>> The important think is to allow the application programmer to use the cluster
>> as easily as using a single computer. Transparency is the keyword here. Such
>> services can be offered very transparently thru the kernel, even if they are
>> not completely implemented inside the kernel.
>
>This is screaming for bare-bones kernel support with the rest
>inside a 'semi-transparent' library...
>A fat kernel is not needed when a library can do more things
>easier.
Right. If the services to application programs are offered only via the
kernel, then we can have near complete transparency. This is one way to cope
with a monolithic kernel.
-Kamran Karimi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu