Microkernels should support passive objects

We believe that a passive object model, in which the active entities or threads migrate between passive objects, is more appropriate than an active object model, as the basic structure of a microkernel-based operating system. A passive object model provides enhanced performance and simplicity because it is more closely matched to the basic nature of microprocessors and the requirements of applications. It also provides more functionality by making the flow of control between objects a first-class abstraction which can be examined, manipulated, and used to carry information about the operation in progress.<<ETX>>

[1]  Brian N. Bershad,et al.  Lightweight remote procedure call , 1989, TOCS.

[2]  Mike Hibler,et al.  FLEX: a tool for building efficient and flexible systems , 1993, Proceedings of IEEE 4th Workshop on Workstation Operating Systems. WWOS-III.

[3]  Samuel T. Chanson,et al.  Distributed, object-based programming systems , 1991, CSUR.

[4]  Mike Hibler,et al.  In-Kernel Servers on Mach 3.0: Implementation and Performance , 1993, USENIX MACH Symposium.

[5]  Mike Hibler,et al.  Notes on Thread Models in Mach 3.0 , 1993 .

[6]  Larry L. Peterson,et al.  Beyond micro-kernel design: decoupling modularity and protection in Lipto , 1992, [1992] Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems.