Re: User API still a goal?

[Michael Neumann <mneumann@xxxxxxxx>]

Michael Neumann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I wonder whether the User API listed under goals, i.e. using message
> passing for system calls instead of direct system calls (int 80), is
> still a goal of DragonFly.
>
> Are there any downsides of this approach not listed under the (very old)
> goals section of the homepage?

And I wonder how the kernel-protected emulation layer is intended to
work. Would that be a piece of code that can be registered for a
specific software interrupt (e.g. int 80h)? That is, in case of x86, the
kernel would install an interrupt handler for int 80 into the IDT for
the process, and this interrupt handler is a user-mode routine.
This user-mode routine will then translate the request into a message
call (using another interrupt vector than int 80h or another syscall
mechanism).

Regards,

  Michael