Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!udel!mmdf
From: HBO043%DJUKFA11.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (Christoph van Wuellen)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: Assorted questions
Message-ID: <24719@nigel.udel.EDU>
Date: 16 Jul 90 12:11:32 GMT
Sender: mmdf@ee.udel.EDU
Lines: 18

I think the aim of all this has nothing to do with parallel computing.
It has to do with readability of code (note that I do not say it IS
readable as it is, but it WAS the intetion).
On a PC, there is quite a trivial reason doing it so:
The address space of the kernel is to small to make all these procedures
fit in it.
To speek for my own, I am VERY sure that all the MM stuff will go to the
Kernel one day. On an ATARI, much of the real work MM does has been moved
to the system task (look at the number of clock ticks each process consumes).
The kernel-MM-interface is horrible regarding signals (with this point, you
are right). It will even be much worse when MINIX is moved to a 386 etc
platform with paging. It is nearly killing to send a message to MM on every
page fault.
The FS, on the other side, is nearly a self-contained entity that may remain
a separate process. This has nothing to do with the fact it is realyy
single-tasking - this will change in the future.

C.v.W.