Re: Just my 2 penny worth..

[Michael Schwingen <rincewind@tubul.dascon.de>]

On Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 12:25:05PM +0100, Stephen Usher wrote:
> >You can't control it - however, that is the case with all drivers: the
> >driver is a black box which handles the hardware - *he* knows how to do
> >this, and everyone else simply has to use the defined interface - inclusing
> >the kernel.
> 
> Precisely my point! The kernel is supposed to be in FULL control of the
> system.. if it then goes and farms out some of its responsibilty to some
> black box it has no control over then it ISN'T in full control.

I think you have a wrong concept of what a driver is supposed to do. A
driver *has* to be a black box, to allow the programmer of the driver the
maximum flexibility in how he implements things. The interface must be
clearly defines, so that the kernel can communicate all its wishes to the
driver - but nothing more.

IMHO, the kernel *should* not have more control about what the driver does
than necessary - what would he need it for? 

If code parts can be easily separated (and kernel and low-level drivers
can), then I see no benefit in putting them together in one big monolithic
block, which makes it very difficlt to make changes at one driver.

> Not at the user level you may not.. but down below where the OS has to work
> there definitely is.

Not sure about that. What for exactly?

> Thinking about it.. more and more you could use the Linux kernel as a basis
> for the new MiNT.. remodelling the memory management and system call stuff
> so as to create a TOS orientated system and binning all the stuff we don't
> need.. such as support for PCs, Alpha boxen etc.. but it would allow us to
> stand on the shoulders of others to reach the stars.

Hm. Why not simply *use* the existing Linux/68k kernel and add the needes
TOS/MiNT compatibility features to it?

Removing code which is used for Alpha etc. (but which the compiler does not
even touch when compiling a 68k kernel) won't give you anything except
reduced disk space for the sources - so I see no need for a new MiNT that
'imports' Linux/68k code, but is not based on a stock Linux/68k kernel.

> However, it would mean dumping the 68000 people if we did that, which is
> something we should avoid.

You can run the Linux kernel on 68000 machines.

> But we need to support the 68000 people too.

So how do you want to do this?

I think we should continue to support 68000 machines. However, I can live
with the fact that new features may only be available on 68030+.

cu
Michael
-- 
Michael Schwingen, Ahornstrasse 36, 52074 Aachen