At Wed, 19 Mar 2008 18:35:56 -0400, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > On Wed, 2008-03-19 at 17:56 +0100, Neal H. Walfield wrote: > > At Wed, 19 Mar 2008 09:58:57 -0400, > > Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > > And throwing a big wrinkle into all that is that many architectures do > > > not make it *possible* for users to handle page faults. The processor > > > dumps a load of crap on the stack, and the kernel must preserve it > > > carefully and then return the fault. It is very hard to encapsulate > > > that so that it can be stored and restored by users without keeping the > > > whole stack around. > > > > L4 was ported to a large number of architectures; it can't be that > > hard. > > Sparc or i386?
I don't understand the question. [1] shows the architectures that Pistachio currently supports. According to [2], there was at least once a Sparc port in the making. Neal [1] http://l4ka.org/projects/pistachio/ [2] https://lists.ira.uni-karlsruhe.de/pipermail/l4ka/2004-August/001020.html
