On 31 Jul 2021, at 17:35, Andrew Warkentin <andreww...@gmail.com> wrote: > > The patches are only for the boot code at the moment, which isn't part > of the verification. However, I may end up having to fork seL4 at some > point
While we cannot prevent forking (but strongly discourage it), please note that you cannot use the name seL4 for an incompatible fork (with a research exception for “experimental” versions, see https://sel4.systems/Foundation/Trademark/). > because the seL4 project's priorities seem to be heavily focused > on static deeply embedded systems rather than desktops, servers, and > large embedded systems. seL4’s notion of priorities are microkernel-style: simple mechanisms that are as policy-free as possible. Actual policies (like the Linux CFS) can (and should) easily be implemented at user mode. See Lyons et al [2018] which implemented EDF scheduling at user level: https://trustworthy.systems/publications/csiroabstracts/Lyons_MAH_18.abstract Gernot _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list -- devel@sel4.systems To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@sel4.systems
