Re: software situation

Subject	Re: software situation
Newsgroups	sci.electronics.design
References	(3 earlier) <10q4oi4$3bqmu$1@dont-email.me> <IqWcneM2AbIpKlv0nZ2dnZfqn_SdnZ2d@giganews.com> <dJSdnQTVoYQNJlv0nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@giganews.com> <_nWdnRNkb8CtIlv0nZ2dnZfqnPEAAAAA@giganews.com> <10q6ijk$3vfr1$2@dont-email.me>
From	Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com>
Date	2026-03-28 06:41 -0700
Message-ID	<ZIadnVf2fMwDR1r0nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@giganews.com> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

On 03/27/2026 11:34 AM, Don Y wrote:
> On 3/27/2026 10:32 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
>> Yeah my O.S. design is basically to take advantage of the fact
>> that the modern commodity architectures have left behind lots
>> of assumptions of the single-core and about interrupts mostly
>> then about the ubiquity of PCIe bus and the necessity of the
>> efficient employment of DMA, then that many-core basically
>> means that modern commodity general-purpose boards need be
>> treated as models of self-contained distributed systems
>> themselves, so, fundamentally "asynchronous", as this simplifies
>> a lot of things, for models of co-operative multi-tasking,
>> while acknowledging that user program are nominally adversarial,
>> and the network is nominally un-trusted.
>
> Divide-and-conquer, information hiding, one-page "programs"
> all suggest an OS should cater to small, "decomposed" problems
> executing in *true* parallelism (the multitasking illusion
> doesn't work in the era of multiple cores/hardware threads,
> distributed systems, etc.
>
> To these criteria, I've added "accountability" as you want to
> be able to wrap a virtual "box" around any set of actors
> and pretend THAT is a product with real world constraints.
> E.g., how do you ensure a task doesn't disproportionately (ab)use
> resources meant to be shared with other co-operating tasks?
> (And, what do you do if/when it does??)
>
> [My most recent OS is, itself, "decomposed" so that parts of it
> can be co-operating instead of having big locks on a monolithic
> kernel]
>

Ah, here the idea of "co-operative scheduler" (vis-a-vis
"pre-emptive scheduler") has that there's a notion of the
model of an o.s. (scheduler, allocator) of co-operation
vis-a-vis "the re-routine", which is a sort of idea like
"co-routine", where basically everything is non-blocking
by design and convention, and instead of a co-routine stack
is a sort of memo-ized monad, then about matters of the
scheduling like "I cut you pick", "straw-pulling", and
"hot potato", with anti-gaming built in to the algorithm,
device drivers are provided as "generic universal drivers",
then that user-space gets a usual "quotas/limits" and
while a contrived user-space program may actually run
a hot inner loop, otherwise the deadlock/starvation and
other issues in concurrency are to be figured out,
for the allocator/scheduler.

I.e., the usual idea of the "co-operative" lives inside
the kernel, user-space is nominally adversarial and
the network is nominally un-trusted.  System calls it's
figured are implemented as of a "co-operative" implementation.

It's mostly as of a "design" while though I put it through
the wringer as it were of some "large, competent, conscientious,
co-operative reasoners" or a "bot panel", I can post a link
or reference or all the text of them.

Back to sci.electronics.design | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

software situation john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-26 10:58 -0700
  Re: software situation Sergey Kubushyn <ksi@koi8.net> - 2026-03-26 20:29 +0000
    Re: software situation Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-26 17:51 -0700
      Re: software situation Sergey Kubushyn <ksi@koi8.net> - 2026-03-27 02:03 +0000
        Re: software situation Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-03-26 21:41 -0700
          Re: software situation Sergey Kubushyn <ksi@koi8.net> - 2026-03-27 06:09 +0000
            Re: software situation Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-03-27 04:15 -0700
          Re: software situation Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-03-27 10:07 +0000
            Re: software situation Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-03-27 05:37 -0700
              Re: software situation Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-03-27 18:24 +0000
                Re: software situation Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-03-27 12:04 -0700
                Re: software situation Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-03-27 22:35 +0000
                Re: software situation Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-03-27 15:58 -0700
                Re: software situation Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-03-29 09:24 +0000
        Re: software situation Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-27 10:00 -0700
          Re: software situation Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-27 10:17 -0700
            Re: software situation Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-27 10:32 -0700
              Re: software situation Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-27 11:22 -0700
              Re: software situation Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-03-27 11:34 -0700
                Re: software situation Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-28 06:41 -0700
                Re: software situation Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-03-28 13:56 -0700
                Re: software situation Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-29 05:53 -0700
                Re: software situation Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-03-29 12:39 -0700
                Re: software situation john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-29 13:13 -0700
                Re: software situation Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-29 14:29 -0700
                Re: software situation john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-29 15:24 -0700
                Re: software situation Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-29 20:54 -0700
                Re: software situation Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-29 21:07 -0700
                Re: software situation Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-29 21:16 -0700
                Re: software situation john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-30 07:44 -0700
                Re: software situation Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-30 09:02 -0700
                Re: software situation john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-30 16:00 -0700
                Re: software situation Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-03-29 17:09 -0700
                Re: software situation Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-29 20:48 -0700
              Re: software situation Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-03-27 21:38 +0000
      Re: software situation someone <cffbf4deb9142bce48974efc0e64dede@example.com> - 2026-03-27 04:30 +0000
      Re: software situation Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2026-03-27 10:35 -0700
        Re: software situation Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-03-27 11:27 -0700
          Re: software situation Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2026-03-27 11:46 -0700
            Re: software situation Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-03-27 14:54 -0700
  Re: software situation someone <cffbf4deb9142bce48974efc0e64dede@example.com> - 2026-03-27 04:30 +0000
    Re: software situation Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2026-03-27 07:41 -0700
      Re: software situation Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2026-03-27 16:04 -0700
      Re: software situation someone <cffbf4deb9142bce48974efc0e64dede@example.com> - 2026-03-30 23:30 +0000
        Re: software situation john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-31 11:01 -0700
          Re: software situation Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2026-03-31 13:54 -0700
            Re: software situation john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-31 15:06 -0700
              Re: software situation Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2026-03-31 16:14 -0700
                Re: software situation Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-31 16:43 -0700
                Re: software situation Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-04-01 06:41 +0000
                Re: software situation john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-04-01 00:49 -0700
                Re: software situation Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2026-04-01 17:39 -0700
        Re: software situation Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2026-03-31 14:15 -0700
          Re: software situation Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-04-01 06:45 +0000
            Re: software situation Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2026-04-01 09:11 -0700
              Re: software situation Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-04-01 09:43 -0700
              Re: software situation Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-04-01 10:35 -0700
    Re: software situation john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-27 08:16 -0700
      Re: software situation Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2026-03-27 09:01 -0700
        Re: software situation Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-03-27 17:57 +0000
          Re: software situation Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2026-03-27 15:06 -0700
            Re: software situation Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-03-27 15:48 -0700
            Re: software situation Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-03-28 00:44 +0000
      Re: software situation someone <cffbf4deb9142bce48974efc0e64dede@example.com> - 2026-03-30 23:30 +0000
  Re: software situation Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-03-27 08:03 +0000
  Re: software situation someone <cffbf4deb9142bce48974efc0e64dede@example.com> - 2026-03-30 23:30 +0000

csiph-web