[openbeos] Re: How far along is Haiku networking?

Nathan Whitehorn <nathanw@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Axel Dörfler wrote:
> > AFAICT it wasn't based on FreeBSD at all, but some other BSD code, 
> > maybe it was OpenBSD I dunno - if it's directly based on it, that 
> > someone didn't bother to preserve the original license, anyway. And 
> > the 
> > only issues I know that most BSDs still have is this giant lock 
> > kernel 
> > land approach.
> FreeBSD (aside from a few things we don't care about like the PS/2 
> keyboard driver) is now giant-lock free. The entire network stack 
> uses 

I know, that's one reason I like FreeBSD better than most of the other 
BSD's :-)

> fine-grained locking. The other BSDs still have horrible SMP problems 
> (with the possible exception of Dragonfly). As to Dragonfly, I'd be 
> hesitant to take their code for a few reasons. Dragonfly is using a 
> kernel threading module (lwkt) which, while very interesting and 
> possibly the better way to do things, is completely alien to the way 
> we've done everything else in the Haiku kernel. FreeBSD, on the other 

Just have a look at our recent discussion in the networking ML - LWKT 
is nothing I'm interested in at all for Haiku.

[...]
> addition, Dragonfly still being a novelty, and FreeBSD being *very* 
> widely used for a variety of mission-critical applications, I trust 
> FreeBSD's stack far more. In addition, while Dragonfly has been 
> exploring interesting new ideas, FreeBSD has added a really nice 
> 802.11 
> layer as well as some other things that would be, in the long run, 
> good 
> for Haiku.

Definitely, I think the FreeBSD stack is the best choice we have (apart 
from Solaris, perhaps).

Bye,
   Axel.

Other related posts: