Re: [9fans] zero copy & 9p (was Re: PDP11 (Was: Re: what heavy negativity!)

[FJ Ballesteros]

yes. bugs, on my side at least. 
The copy isolates from others. 
But some experiments in nix and in a thing I wrote for leanxcale show that some 
things can be much faster. 
It’s fun either way. 

> El 13 oct 2018, a las 23:11, hiro <23h...@gmail.com> escribió:
> 
> and, did it improve anything noticeably?
> 
>> On 10/13/18, Charles Forsyth  wrote:
>> I did several versions of one part of zero copy, inspired by several things
>> in x-kernel, replacing Blocks by another structure throughout the network
>> stacks and kernel, then made messages visible to user level. Nemo did
>> another part, on his way to Clive
>> 
>>> On Fri, 12 Oct 2018, 07:05 Ori Bernstein,  wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 13:43:00 -0700, Lyndon Nerenberg 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
 Another case to ponder ...   We're handling the incoming I/Q data
 stream, but need to fan that out to many downstream consumers.  If
 we already read the data into a page, then flip it to the first
 consumer, is there a benefit to adding a reference counter to that
 read-only page and leaving the page live until the counter expires?
 
 Hiro clamours for benchmarks.  I agree.  Some basic searches I've
 done don't show anyone trying this out with P9 (and publishing
 their results).  Anybody have hints/references to prior work?
 
 --lyndon
 
>>> 
>>> I don't believe anyone has done the work yet. I'd be interested
>>> to see what you come up with.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>>Ori Bernstein
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 

Re: [9fans] Fwd: ubiquitous environment?

[FJ Ballesteros]

I don't think anyone is running it anymore.
At least, I'm not running it.
Sorry.

> El 8 mar 2018, a las 13:38, Rudolf Sykora  escribió:
> 
>> On 3 March 2018 at 20:27, Francisco J Ballesteros  wrote:
>> Octopus would run on Plan 9, although we used inferno for (hosted) terminals,
>> and it used Op as the protocol (a descendant of 9p like everyone else),
> 
> Ok. So does anybody use octopus these days?
> Why not? (Who wouldn't like a ubiquitous environment?)
> What do the authors of octopus use instead these days? (Clive seems
> to me to serve a completely different purpose.)
> 
> It seems the octopus environment uses a tile-like management
> of its windows, unlike rio, where windows can overlap.
> Has anybody done any experiments to arrive at a rio-like feel?
> 
> How is it with the need for inferno?
> (I tried to install octopus now on 9front. Unfortunately it asks me
> too many questions I am, at this moment, unable to answer---I do
> not understand them.)
> 
> Thanks
> Ruda
> 

Re: [9fans] Why is the tcp/ip stack of plan9 implemented in kernel?

[FJ Ballesteros]

VSTa had a design heavily inspired by 9 and had the net stack at user level. 
It was fun to play with it, long ago. 

> El 27 ene 2018, a las 8:04, lchg  escribió:
> 
> In plan9, many os components are moved to user space, even disk file system. 
> But the tcp/ip stack is an exception, what's the consideration for this? Just 
> for performance, or some other reasons?
> And is there a relatively easy solution to move the stack to user space?
>