From: "Christoph Lameter (Ampere)" <cl@gentwo.org>
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pasha.tatashin@soleen.com,
Cong Wang <cwang@multikernel.io>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>, Alexander Graf <graf@amazon.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
Changyuan Lyu <changyuanl@google.com>,
kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [RFC Patch 0/7] kernel: Introduce multikernel architecture support
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2025 10:51:28 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <78127855-104f-46e2-e5d2-52c622243b08@gentwo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250918222607.186488-1-xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>
You dont really need any kernel support to run multiple kernels on an SMP
system. Multiple kernels can operate without a hypervisor or anything
complicated like that.
The firmware can prep the kernel boot so that the kernels operate
on distinct address spaces, processors and I/O resources. Whereupon you
have the challenge to communicate betweeen the kernels which led to
various forms of "ethernet" drives communicating via shard memory.
This has been done for decades. I have stuff run stuff like this on
SGI hardware and Sparc/Neon back in 2003. ARM should also do this without
too much fuss.
There is even a device driver to share memory between those kernels called
XPMEM (which was developed on SGI machines decades ago for exactly this
purpose). Its ancient.
There is nothing new under the sun as already expressed over 2000 years
ago in Ecclesiastes 1:9. ;-)
The improvement here is that the burden of implementation away from
firmware and we can then have a memory based "ethernet" shared memory
implementation indepedent of the architecture.
The reason this was done by SGI is to avoid scaling issues. Machines with
high numbers of cores can slow down because of serialization overhead in
the kernel.
The segmentation of the cores into various kernel images reduces the
scaling problem (but then lead to a communication bottleneck).
The rationale for Sparc/Neon were hardware limitations that resulted
in broken cache coherency between cores from multiple sockets. A kernel
expected coherent memory and thus one kernel for each coherency domain was
a solution. ;-)
AFAICT various contemporary Android deployments do the multiple kernel
approach in one way or another already for security purposes and for
specialized controllers. However, the multi kernel approaches are often
depending on specialized and dedicated hardware. It may be difficult to
support with a generic approach developed here.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-24 17:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-18 22:25 Cong Wang
2025-09-18 22:26 ` [RFC Patch 1/7] kexec: Introduce multikernel support via kexec Cong Wang
2025-09-18 22:26 ` [RFC Patch 2/7] x86: Introduce SMP INIT trampoline for multikernel CPU bootstrap Cong Wang
2025-09-18 22:26 ` [RFC Patch 3/7] x86: Introduce MULTIKERNEL_VECTOR for inter-kernel communication Cong Wang
2025-09-18 22:26 ` [RFC Patch 4/7] kernel: Introduce generic multikernel IPI communication framework Cong Wang
2025-09-18 22:26 ` [RFC Patch 5/7] x86: Introduce arch_cpu_physical_id() to obtain physical CPU ID Cong Wang
2025-09-18 22:26 ` [RFC Patch 6/7] kexec: Implement dynamic kimage tracking Cong Wang
2025-09-18 22:26 ` [RFC Patch 7/7] kexec: Add /proc/multikernel interface for " Cong Wang
2025-09-19 10:10 ` [syzbot ci] Re: kernel: Introduce multikernel architecture support syzbot ci
2025-09-19 13:14 ` [RFC Patch 0/7] " Pasha Tatashin
2025-09-20 21:13 ` Cong Wang
2025-09-19 21:26 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2025-09-20 21:40 ` Cong Wang
2025-09-22 14:28 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2025-09-22 22:41 ` Cong Wang
2025-09-23 17:05 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2025-09-24 11:38 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-09-24 12:51 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2025-09-24 18:28 ` Cong Wang
2025-09-24 19:03 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2025-09-27 19:42 ` Cong Wang
2025-09-29 15:11 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2025-10-02 4:17 ` Cong Wang
2025-09-24 17:18 ` Cong Wang
2025-09-21 1:47 ` Hillf Danton
2025-09-22 21:55 ` Cong Wang
2025-09-24 1:12 ` Hillf Danton
2025-09-24 17:30 ` Cong Wang
2025-09-24 22:42 ` Hillf Danton
2025-09-21 5:54 ` Jan Engelhardt
2025-09-21 6:24 ` Mike Rapoport
2025-09-24 17:51 ` Christoph Lameter (Ampere) [this message]
2025-09-24 18:39 ` Cong Wang
2025-09-26 9:50 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2025-09-27 20:43 ` Cong Wang
2025-09-28 14:22 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2025-09-28 14:36 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2025-09-28 14:41 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2025-09-25 15:47 ` Jiaxun Yang
2025-09-27 20:06 ` Cong Wang
2025-09-26 9:01 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2025-09-27 20:27 ` Cong Wang
2025-09-27 20:39 ` Pasha Tatashin
2025-09-28 14:08 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=78127855-104f-46e2-e5d2-52c622243b08@gentwo.org \
--to=cl@gentwo.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bhe@redhat.com \
--cc=changyuanl@google.com \
--cc=cwang@multikernel.io \
--cc=graf@amazon.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=pasha.tatashin@soleen.com \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox