OSDev.org

I may have posted this in the wrong forum but I just cannot decide what to call my OS - A microkernel, nanokernel or exokernel, or hybrid. So heres the stuff I have inside the kernel:

- Simple boot sequence
- Driver manager
- Event manager

Stuff thats in userspace:
Drivers (this includes video text mode driver.)
MMU
Multitasking
File system
Everything else
Could some one please help me decide whether it is a micro kernel or not so I can complete the docs?

That's definitely a microkernel in my book. I don't even export memory management or scheduling to userspace, and I still consider my system a microkernel.

Here's how I generally judge it: if I wanted to write a driver (block, filesystem, or otherwise) for your OS, could I do it completely in userspace without modifying the kernel in any way? If so, you have a microkernel. This just barely rules out things like FUSE, which require kernel modifications, but keeps basically anything that has the practical benefits of a microkernel, which is what matters in the end anyway.

I wouldn't include the startup sequence in the kernel itself.

for the rest I can Completely find myself in line with ACurrent's list.

Typically the components of a microkernel are limited to processor and CPU time management, memory management and event handling, for various opinionated definitions of those terms.

For instance to get a processor to do useful stuff you have to get the first program to run on it.

I wouldn't include the startup sequence in the kernel itself.

Think practically like combuster! Any way thanks for the support, I think my kernel and docs should be out December 18th.

"microkernel" term considered harmful