|
From: | William Grim |
Subject: | Re: Device Driver Framework (attached thesis proposal) |
Date: | Sun, 22 Jan 2006 01:19:52 -0600 |
William Grim wrote:
> Hello, group.
>
> I've been wanting to create a device driver framework for Hurd-L4 for
> quite some time. I understand Hurd-L4 is considering Coyotos, but that
> should not greatly affect the DDF code from my perspective.
>
> To keep from being too wordy here, since I already have enough words in
> a thesis proposal for you to read, I won't talk much more. However, I
> was wondering if anyone would be kind enough to review my proposal (that
> is very near the final edition of the proposal) and see if they notice
> something I missed or think it's a good idea?
>
Some basic thoughts:
- session free protocols would be nice
- reply IPC must not block
- indirect talk to drivers through the ddm should be avoided
- as I understand it, bus drivers are part of the ddm? This doesn't
sound well-founded and actually breaks with the microkernel design,
IMHO
> I admit that my proposal still has some inconsistencies in it and is
> not completely finished, but I hope it will be enough to get the point
> across to the readers in the meantime.
>
> Thanks in advance; I've spent the last several months working on it
> alongside my other work and course work.
>
> --
> William M. Grim
> Computer Science Master's Student, Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville
> Unix Network Administrator, SIUE, CS. Dept.
>
--
-ness-
_______________________________________________
L4-hurd mailing list
address@hidden
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |