Monolithic Kernel: Difference between revisions
| [unchecked revision] | [unchecked revision] |
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
m BSD is not a single OS |
||
| (8 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Template:Kernel designs}}
==Design==
{|align="right"
|[[Image:Monolithic.png|frame|right|Basic overview of a monolithic kernel.]]
|}
A monolithic kernel includes all (or at least, most) of its services in the kernel proper.
This reduces the amount of context switches and messaging involved, making the concept faster than a [[Microkernel]]. On the downside, the amount of code running in kernel space makes the kernel more prone to fatal bugs.
The word "monolithic" by itself means a single piece (mono) that is of or like stone (lithic), however when applied to kernels the exact meaning is more general. Most people{{who}} consider that a kernel where device drivers and services run as part of the kernel is a monolithic kernel, regardless of whether parts are dynamically loaded "kernel modules" or if everything is a true single unchangeable binary. For this reason
Modern versions of Linux are a well-known example of a monolithic kernel - while drivers are shipped as dynamically loaded "kernel modules" they are still loaded into and running in kernel space. Monolithic kernels are common for the 80x86/PC architecture.
Line 12 ⟶ 17:
In general most OS's aren't "pure monolithic" or "pure micro-kernel", but fall somewhere between these extremes in order to make use of the advantages of both methods.
==Examples==
*Linux
*MSDOS, including Windows 9x (95, 98, Me)
*Mac OS <= 8.6
*Most BSDs
*[[Xv6]]
[[Category:Kernel]]
| |||