So is Mach, by the way, if you can afford the microkernel performance overhead.
So is Mach, by the way, if you can afford the microkernel performance overhead.
Someone will of course bring up XNU, but the microkernel aspect of it died when they smashed the FreeBSD kernel into the codebase. DriverKit has brought some userspace drivers back, but they use shared memory for all the heavy lifting.
As opposed to Mach, which is not used in any actual systems
The Linux kernel was and is a monstrosity.
I don't think they ever intended to keep all drivers strictly userland, though. Just the service side.
The Windows NT code was engineered to be portable across many different architectures--not just X86--so it has a hardware abstraction layer. The kernel only ever communicated to the device-driver implementation through this abstraction layer; so the kernel code itself was isolated.
That doesn't mean the device drivers were running in user-land privilege, but it does mean that the kernel code is quite stable and easy to reason about.
When Microsoft decided to compromise on this design, I remember senior engineers--when I first started my career--being abuzz about it for Windows NT 4.0 (or apparently earlier?).
And it is irrelevant anyway, given that this comment was written from 10.0.26100.
You’re saying they improved the design. I know they added user-privilege device driver support for USB (etc).; did they revert the display compromise/mess as well?
Hence why graphics usually no longer crash Windows, after a small black screen pause, everything continues as usual.
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/d...