gsbase-less kernel
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Rust
- Stars
- 2.7k
- Forks
- 144
- Avg merge
- 12h 21m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 146
Description
> > Side note, Coconut avoids use of gsbase in kernel mode altogether and instead has a per-CPU region of the kernel-mode address space (and per-CPU kernel-mode page tables). Interesting design choice...
>
> Interesting. Our LiteBox kernel platform is still WiP, so we can adopt coconut's idea if it makes sense. Using `gsbase` and `swapgs` is not a strict requirement (might have a minor performance impact, though).
I'm trying to get more information about why they made this design choice. I think with their current design it's less efficient than using `gsbase`, but I don't think that has to be the case...
_Originally posted by @jstarks in https://github.com/microsoft/litebox/issues/510#issuecomment-3559546285_
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
No file, test, or entry point is named. Start with the design discussion in issue #510 and the referenced Coconut approach, then inspect LiteBox's current gsbase and swapgs usage. Done means establishing whether a gsbase-less per-CPU design should be adopted and documenting the resulting implementation scope.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- operating-systems
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100