Monolithic Vs Micro Kernel

Question about which tools to use, bugs, the best way to implement a function, etc should go here. Don't forget to see if your question is answered in the wiki first! When in doubt post here.
Tom

Re:Monolithic Vs Micro Kernel

Post by Tom »

this is not really how it works exactly( i know..i know)...but I wanted you to have a really simple example:

rings in the processor are stuff that let your OS do things without the processor...protected mode - protects the computer ;)

Ring 0 lets your kernel do whatever it wants.

Ring 3 protects whatever you want ( your OS's apps for example ) from messing up things. ( I wonder if Windows Apps run in ring 0 ? )

The higher the ring number...the more protection.

Hope that helps...if you want a more detailed example I can get links...
suhmaamiar

Re:Monolithic Vs Micro Kernel

Post by suhmaamiar »

>Hope that helps...if you want a more detailed example I can get links...

yeah sure it will be a great help :)

and what about ring 1 and 2 ? do they exist or not ?

thanks

suhmaamiar
Curufir

Re:Monolithic Vs Micro Kernel

Post by Curufir »

Most processors only have 2 rings, intel x86 processors beyond 286 have 4.

Ring 0 : Most privileged, mostly used for system code
Ring 1: Mostly used for driver code
Ring 2: Mostly used for system libraries
Ring 3: Least privileged, mostly used for user applications

2 level processors can be equate to only having a ring 0 and ring 3. Some OS (Eg Linux afaik) only use ring 0 and ring 3 even on x86 architecture for portability reasons.

What this means. A processor operating in ring 3 can't access ring 0 code/data without passing through a call gate, etc. Basically most of the hardware protection hangs off the protection level the code is currently running in.

The intel docs give a pretty good explanation of how these work, so have a read of those if you're confused.

Curufir
suhmaamiar

Re:Monolithic Vs Micro Kernel

Post by suhmaamiar »

Curufir, do you know any valid link for the documents
describing the ring structures ?
Curufir

Re:Monolithic Vs Micro Kernel

Post by Curufir »

http://x86.ddj.com/intel.doc/386manuals.htm

The one you want is "Intel Architecture Software Developer's Manual, Volume 3: System Programming Guide". Look under protection.

Curufir
suhmaamiar

Re:Monolithic Vs Micro Kernel

Post by suhmaamiar »

stilll not clear

i need some expert's opinion here or some technical
papers on this topics

for the last 5 or 6 days i have been searching all around
the web and found a very little amount of relevant
data

gone through all of my text books, and still not clear :(
suhmaamiar

Re:Monolithic Vs Micro Kernel

Post by suhmaamiar »

after all that time i have finally found some thing
very informative on this subject, here is the link ;D

http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/projects/spr ... apers.html
Perica
Member
Member
Posts: 454
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 12:50 am

Re:Monolithic Vs Micro Kernel

Post by Perica »

..
Last edited by Perica on Sun Dec 03, 2006 9:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
suhmaamiar

Re:Monolithic Vs Micro Kernel

Post by suhmaamiar »

the question was

which one is a better design for a distributed operating
system ?

A monolithic OR A Micro Kernel ?

do you really think this matter is discussed in intel
manual ??? :-\

the site i have refered, has a paper which compares
a monolithic DOS (Sprite) with a micro DOS (Amoeba)
User avatar
Pype.Clicker
Member
Member
Posts: 5964
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 2:31 am
Location: In a galaxy, far, far away
Contact:

Re:Monolithic Vs Micro Kernel

Post by Pype.Clicker »

In a distributed OS, you usually don't know where the services like display, database, applications and filesystems are running on the network, and you don't want the applications to see the difference between opening a local file or a remote file.

You don't want either the application to see whether the display is remote or local, etc.
In that way, most communications will use a message-based approach (because you can hardly rely on shared memory in the case of distributed OSes :-/ ), which is usually available in micro-kernels and widely used.

So i would say micro-kernels are better suited to Distributed OSes ... though other people could tell you that Unix+X-Window+NFS looks like a distributed system and that it has monolithic kernel ...
Post Reply