Is QNX really a microkernel operating system?

[Accellular]

Maybe a stupid question, is QNX really a microkernel operating system? Is there anyone familiar with QNX who can provide more precise reference information instead of the common description of QNX logical architecture on the Internet?

[Peter Shkenev]

Hello,

This group is for discussions of MINIX 3 operating system. For questions on QNX, please refer to their tech support.

---
Best regards,
Peter

[Accellular]

Hi,

I understood that and I forgot to explain the background of the question. From the situation of MINIX and other microkernel operating systems, it seems that microkernels are difficult to be practical. However, QNX is a microkernel operating system that is said to have been practical for many years, and it is also a real-time operating system. Intuitively, it feels a bit abnormal.

[Peter Shkenev]

This doesn't make QNX any more on-topic.

Practicality of QNX (whatever that means) doesn't contradict the statement "microkernels are difficult to be practical".

---
Best regards,
Peter

[Accellular]

OK, I will look for other information about this question elsewhere, thank you for your reply.

[Accellular]

After some investigation, I think QNX is most likely not a microkernel like MINIX, at least the process management function runs in kernel space. I managed to run a QNX virtual machine, and I didn't see any process management, memory management, or process scheduler like in MINIX in the process list.

Although the official documentation does not explicitly state this, it can be seen from various signs that the process management module (procnto) runs in kernel space.

Source:

https://www.qnx.com/developers/docs/8.0/com.qnx.doc.neutrino.sys_arch/topic/proc.html

[Minh Nguyen]

Trying to keep this thread more on-topic :) 

Minix3 slogan "One laptop per child" has been removed from its web site, indicating that it certainly failed its original mission. IMHO its failure is not due to microkernel architecture. There are examples of microkernel OS in real life such as Fuchsia. Minix3 failed because it is not user friendly to the end users. It turned out the clear winner for this mission is the browser based Chromebooks where heavy duty processing happens in the cloud.

Minh

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "minix3" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to minix3+un...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/minix3/cc510d76-2b11-490e-b399-8234bf781406n%40googlegroups.com.

[Accellular]

I agree with you. Even the emerging Redox OS provides a sufficiently user-friendly unboxing experience, although many of its functions are insufficient. But after all, MINIX was an educational operating system from the beginning, which is pretty good.