Singularity Revisited

Posted By: Charles | Dec 1st, 2005 @ 4:10 PM | 132,965 Views | 48 Comments
Charles Torre again sits down with some of the people behind MSR's Singularity research OS. This time, we drill down into the architecture of Singularity and discuss design decisions, usage of safe code, Channels, SIPs, etc. We even manage to get Galen Hunt, the OS Guy, up to the white board to map out some of Singularity's architecture. 

In addition to the usual Singularity suspects, Jim Larus and Galen Hunt, Manuel Fahndrich and David Tarditi, both Senior Researchers involved in the Singularity project, join in the conversation and provide excellent insights into the languages and tools used to make Singularity.

Enjoy.
Rating:
1
0
#Dec 1st, 2005 @ 5:01 PM
Sven Groot
Sven Groot
My name has 9 letters. Coincidence? I think not...
I'd just like to point out the spelling error in the thread title... Wink
#Dec 1st, 2005 @ 5:01 PM
DuNuNuBatman
DuNuNuBatman
I don't know why it is, but this thing is just cool...
Any chance you guys are going to open up a little bit of the source to the rest of the world? Or are you planning on making this into something?
#Dec 1st, 2005 @ 5:02 PM
Charles
Charles
Welcome Change
Thanks, Sven. Fixed...
C
#Dec 1st, 2005 @ 5:25 PM
Manip
Manip
OMG!!! I haven't watched it yet.. But THANK YOU CHANNEL 9 TEAM!

You guys rock! No.1

I get WHY they don't want dynamic loading; but it is a shame, dynamic loading is amazingly powerful.. For one example plugins, how would you implement an extension mechanism for your programs without the ability to dynamically load?

Another thing; there is lots of discussion about compiler checks and with no JIT running what is from stopping someone from writing raw x86 (or whatever it is compiled to) and using pointers to gain admin rights on the system? In fact if you can't trust the running code what is stopping anyone from gaining greater privileges on the system or over-writing the kernel with their own one?

Or do you assume local code is safe to run on  the system?

Edit: All of this was answered later in the video... Good questions Charles, thanks.
#Dec 1st, 2005 @ 5:51 PM
Tonatiúh
Tonatiúh
Cuali itcha a cosamalot
What a wonderful welcome!... Thank you Charles and Singularity Project Team... I have to left my home about 3:00 a.m. (GMT-6) to meet my love for dinner and I just have arrived full of happiness... And what I see when I loged in to Channel 9...

Thank you again.

Tonatiúh
#Dec 1st, 2005 @ 6:03 PM
Charles
Charles
Welcome Change
You're welcome, Tonatiúh

Keep in mind that at the end of the video we did talk about a part 3 Wink

I hear you, the Singularity folks are doing some of the most innovative OS work in the world (though they'd never agree with that). The possible uses of Singularity, and what's learned from it, will take security and reliability to a new level some day...

Much thanks to the Singularity folks who took an hour out of their schedule to talk to Channel 9.

Glad your questions were answered in the video, Manip!

C
#Dec 1st, 2005 @ 6:35 PM
jmacdonagh
jmacdonagh
Charles wrote:
You're welcome, Tonatiúh

Keep in mind that at the end of the video we did talk about a part 3

I hear you, the Singularity folks are doing some of the most innovative OS work in the world (though they'd never agree with that). The possible uses of Singularity, and what's learned from it, will take security and reliability to a new level some day...

Much thanks to the Singularity folks who took an hour out of their schedule to talk to Channel 9.

Glad your questions were answered in the video, Manip!

C


Wow, an hour of awesome content and there's still so much more to talk about!

Any ideas when you're going to film the next installment?
#Dec 1st, 2005 @ 6:45 PM
amotif
amotif
No Silver Bullet
Wow, nice vid, Charles. And nice question:

Charles wrote:
...of course on Windows I can run applications, right?


A few comments:

The file system run for benchmarks--was it FAT/FAT32/NTFS?

Closed processes: no dynamic code loading?! This seems like a weakness from the developer's perspective. E.g., does this prohibit the ability to load plug-ins? DLLs? Configuration-defined type loading? (Seems like a weak-ness...)

On choosing threads over event-driven architecture:
"You lose the structure of the code if you write it as a bunch of event handlers. You know, each handler makes sense, but you don’t see the big picture. You don't see the forest for the trees. And moreover there's a lot of experience in, you know, windowing code, for instance, that says that this is extremely difficult code for people to maintain, because the first person who wrote it may have had a clear picture in their mind but it goes away… and the next person coming along has no idea what it is."
Amen. But shouldn't good design and design artifacts (comments, documents, drawings, etc.) take care of some of that? Is that too much to ask of developers?

ExHeap: very interesting. Smiley

Any chance Bartok and stand-alone compiled-to-native-code apps will happen on XP/Vista in the next five years. (Gratuitous, feel-good question.  Smiley)


#Dec 1st, 2005 @ 7:26 PM
ploe
ploe
<3 the singularity videos

os research is just plain fascinating...my favorite CS class Big Smile
Microsoft Communities