[Info-vax] What would be involved in moving RMS into kernel mode ?

[Simon Clubley]

On 2023-05-09, John Reagan <xyzzy1959 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 9, 2023 at 8:08:14?AM UTC-4, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> On 2023-05-07, Gary Sparkes <mok... at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Friday, May 5, 2023 at 8:17:02?AM UTC-4, Simon Clubley wrote: 
>> >> It will be nice to get a proper production release of VMS so that we 
>> >> know for sure, but it doesn't look like that is going to happen this 
>> >> year. :-( 
>> >> Simon. 
>> > 
>> > Isn't that what V9.2 is? :)
>> No. Regardless of what the VSI marketing division would have you believe. 
>> 
>> VMS is not production-ready until it is built using the final optimised 
>> compilers.
>> Simon. 
>> 
> Seems like an arbitrary requirement.  Not one that I would use.
>

It's one requirement. There are others, such as the layered products.

Someone with your experience should know what tends to happen when
you turn on optimisation in a code base that was previously developed
with optimisation turned off. :-)

> Would is surprise you that several pieces of OpenVMS on Alpha and Itanium are
> not built with full optimization turned on?  For example, several of the language RTLs
> are compiled with /OPTIMIZE=LEVEL=2 instead of the default of LEVEL=4.  It allowed
> me to single step thru the code at the instruction level without losing my hair (well, that
> didn't work so well however).  I've never bothered to put them back.  For code that spends
> most of its time waiting on I/Os to complete, the extra optimization is invisible.
>

That kind of thing I have absolutely no problem with, provided it's
part of the intended design, and provided that any such code is heavily
tested if the optimisation levels are changed.

Simon.

-- 
Simon Clubley, clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.