Thanks for your posts. It is really a useful discussion.
Code: Select all
Also Linux source code is a very bad thing to learn from, it's ugly
Code: Select all
Also Linux source code is a very bad thing to learn from, it's ugly
...used in the Linux kernel at that time.osdevkid wrote:The linux OS/Kernel books are teaching us only the concepts...
Yes, you are right.Solar wrote:...used in the Linux kernel at that time.osdevkid wrote:The linux OS/Kernel books are teaching us only the concepts...
For learning about what is possible in OS design, more generic books are advised. Without the knowledge of what Linux did not implement, you will always be tied to imitating Linux.
Learning OS concepts from generic books is always good, however to get more confidence on OS, in particular, when we start learning, we need to refer atleast one free (simple) OS source code, that is defnitely not Linux 2.6.x , it may be suitable for professional people, but not for students like me.Solar wrote:While early Linux sources might be a nice source for learning some tricks, they're a very bad source for learning about concepts. By the time Linux matured to 2.6.x, many of those concepts had been changed because they weren't so brilliant to begin with.osdevkid wrote:The linux OS/Kernel books are teaching us only the concepts...
So my options are to be either whiny ***** or to spoon feed the OP. Accusations like these were exactly what I was trying to avoid. Didn't you notice I advised her to study the code that GCC produces? Which I think is a good way to understand how inline assembly works. It helped me a lot at least.JamesM wrote:If you're going to pooh-pooh something, please explain why so the OP can learn instead of being a whiny ***** about it.
Her? or, Him?Hobbes wrote:So my options are to be either whiny ***** or to spoon feed the OP. Accusations like these were exactly what I was trying to avoid. Didn't you notice I advised her to study the code that GCC produces? Which I think is a good way to understand how inline assembly works. It helped me a lot at least.
I suggest to read at leastosdevkid wrote: Learning OS concepts from generic books is always good, however to get more confidence on OS, in particular, when we start learning, we need to refer atleast one free (simple) OS source code
However, reading a port is less likely to have adverse sideeffects than writing a port - especially when something does turn out to be there.Chandra wrote:You can't see that particular code in newer Kernel Souce. It is already depreciated. Instead, a newer method of delaying is introduced, by writing to the port that doesn't exit (0x80). This seems reasonable.![]()
That said, the topic is relatively trivial anyway, and it really generates no interest unless you simply wanted to get annoyed; the topic title is quite indicative of something newcomer related, so you could have just steered clear of it or browsed while scoffing before closing the tab in dismissal. You don't really have a duty to "break in newbies" or anything mind youHobbes wrote:So my options are to be either whiny ***** or to spoon feed the OP. Accusations like these were exactly what I was trying to avoid. Didn't you notice I advised her to study the code that GCC produces? Which I think is a good way to understand how inline assembly works. It helped me a lot at least.JamesM wrote:If you're going to pooh-pooh something, please explain why so the OP can learn instead of being a whiny ***** about it.
Well, we have to rely on something, don't we. It would be rude to call the OP "it", and female programmers may be rare, but not that rare.Chandra wrote:Her? or, Him? Actually, I don't trust Avatar.
Okay, another option is not to reply at all. But inline assembly may be very tricky until you get the hang of it, and I tried to point the OP some direction. I am not annoyed at all, and I am sorry if I made the impression that I am.gravaera wrote:That said, the topic is relatively trivial anyway, and it really generates no interest unless you simply wanted to get annoyed; the topic title is quite indicative of something newcomer related, so you could have just steered clear of it or browsed while scoffing before closing the tab in dismissal. You don't really have a duty to "break in newbies" or anything mind you