Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Linux Kernel Explorer

reverser.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 101 posts

Re: Linux Kernel Explorer

#81

Post by opello »

Gormanu wrote: post #31

You know, I think this Explorer is exactly the tool many of us lacked. Reading the Linux kernel source always felt daunting — thousands of files, confusing paths, complex structure. This feels like a “map” that helps you orient yourself, see how parts interconnect, how VFS works, how modules tie together. Yeah, sometimes a feature breaks (API limits, errors opening directories), but even so — this is a great way to p…

It reminds me of LXR:

https://lxr.linux.no/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LXR_Cross_Referencer

which when I started working with Linux was a great asset. At some point it seems it inspired a reimplementation in Python:

https://elixir.bootlin.com/

https://github.com/bootlin/elixir

Re: Linux Kernel Explorer

#82

Post by bakugo »

soraminazuki wrote: post #80
bakugo wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it or is it not AI generated? That's all I said, and you didn't deny it.

Calm down. You had the answer served on a platter. From "The Kernel in the Mind": > The Kernel Is Not a Process. It Is the System. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/kernel-mind-moon-hee-lee-miwz... It's X but Y came from elsewhere.

> This isn’t a guide to writing kernel code. It’s an effort to understand how the Linux kernel thinks.

> not of function calls, but of how the kernel responds

> The kernel is not a process but the very foundation

> The Linux kernel is not just a set of subsystems—it is a layered system that enforces structure at runtime

> This flexibility does not come from runtime detection or dynamic reconfiguration. It comes from structure.

> Identity is not discovered at runtime. It is defined before execution begins.

> The kernel doesn't view memory as a simple map, but as a responsibility

> Memory Is Not a Place. It’s a System.

> Memory safety relies on disciplined handoffs, not centralized control or type enforcement.

> The Linux kernel goes beyond executing code; it enforces strict control

> Kernel execution is not linear code—it’s structured control

This legitimately hurts to read. I think I'm going to have an aneurysm if I continue.

Re: Linux Kernel Explorer

#83

Post by crabmusket »

reverserdev wrote: post #68
bakugo wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The very first sentence of the guide is "It's not X—it's Y. It does Z". Safe to assume the entire thing is AI generated.

Can you please elaborate what exactly is the problem with the first sentence? "The kernel isn't a process—it's the system. It serves user processes, reacts to context, and enforces separation and control." This is actually based on "The Kernel in The Mind" by Moon Hee Lee. You are welcome to provide feedback.

> This is actually based on "The Kernel in The Mind" by Moon Hee Lee.

This looks like a really interesting resource. Can anybody here vouch for its accuracy or usefulness? I can't find a ton about it online. The fact that it's only published as a series of LinkedIn posts, or a PDF attached to a LinkedIn post, does not fill me with confidence - but I guess we can't expect kernel devs to know how to create websites?

Re: Linux Kernel Explorer

#84

Post by loeg »

soraminazuki wrote: post #78
loeg wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In particular, one of the first questions is "What is the fundamental difference between the kernel and a process?" It rejects "The kernel is a special process with elevated privileges" (which is essentially correct) and prefers "The kernel is not a process—it's the system itself that serves processes," which is sort of wrong? The kernel represents itself as a process (process zero), because kernel threads also need…

> The kernel represents itself as a process (process zero) This isn't true of any modern operating system. Kernel code isn't confined to a single process or even a limited number of processes. Transitioning to kernel mode doesn't necessitate switching to a dedicated process. Prior to the emergence of CPU speculative execution vulnerabilities, it was common for kernel code to be mapped directly into the virtual addres…

This article (and comment you’re replying to) is about Linux, which does represent its own threads as pid 0. Yes, there are concepts that aren’t threads. Nevertheless, in a very real sense the kernel is a special process zero.

Re: Linux Kernel Explorer

#85

Post by soraminazuki »

loeg wrote: post #84
soraminazuki wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The kernel represents itself as a process (process zero) This isn't true of any modern operating system. Kernel code isn't confined to a single process or even a limited number of processes. Transitioning to kernel mode doesn't necessitate switching to a dedicated process. Prior to the emergence of CPU speculative execution vulnerabilities, it was common for kernel code to be mapped directly into the virtual addres…

This article (and comment you’re replying to) is about Linux, which does represent its own threads as pid 0. Yes, there are concepts that aren’t threads. Nevertheless, in a very real sense the kernel is a special process zero.

Again, no it's not. Most kernel code doesn't run as PID 0. What you're talking about is the idle task, a very small part of the kernel.

I also did have Linux in mind when writing my comment, but this is basic to how any major general purpose operating system works. Besides, I can't possibly exclude Linux when I say "any modern operating system."

Re: Linux Kernel Explorer

#87

Post by zamadatix »

Gormanu wrote: post #31

You know, I think this Explorer is exactly the tool many of us lacked. Reading the Linux kernel source always felt daunting — thousands of files, confusing paths, complex structure. This feels like a “map” that helps you orient yourself, see how parts interconnect, how VFS works, how modules tie together. Yeah, sometimes a feature breaks (API limits, errors opening directories), but even so — this is a great way to p…

Not that I care much if things are written by AI or not, but there has been a large stream of new accounts posting " " template posts with em dashes and other generically "AI styled" writing hints. My only thought is it's an easy way to get bot accounts past karma thresholds.

Whatever the reason, and I'm not writing this to say that you are one such account or not, adopting a near identical commenting approach is probably why a lot of your comments have been struggling.

Re: Linux Kernel Explorer

#88

Post by zamadatix »

Gormanu wrote: post #31

You know, I think this Explorer is exactly the tool many of us lacked. Reading the Linux kernel source always felt daunting — thousands of files, confusing paths, complex structure. This feels like a “map” that helps you orient yourself, see how parts interconnect, how VFS works, how modules tie together. Yeah, sometimes a feature breaks (API limits, errors opening directories), but even so — this is a great way to p…

Not that I care much if things are written by AI or not, but there has been a large stream of new accounts posting " " template posts with em dashes and other generically "AI styled" writing hints. My only thought is it's an easy way to get bot accounts past karma thresholds.

Whatever the reasons for these new accounts, and I'm not writing this to say that you are one such account or not, adopting a near identical style and template in certain responses is probably why some of your comments have been struggling.

Re: Linux Kernel Explorer

#89

Post by reverserdev »

bakugo wrote: post #82
soraminazuki wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calm down. You had the answer served on a platter. From "The Kernel in the Mind": > The Kernel Is Not a Process. It Is the System. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/kernel-mind-moon-hee-lee-miwz... It's X but Y came from elsewhere.

> This isn’t a guide to writing kernel code. It’s an effort to understand how the Linux kernel thinks. > not of function calls, but of how the kernel responds > The kernel is not a process but the very foundation > The Linux kernel is not just a set of subsystems—it is a layered system that enforces structure at runtime > This flexibility does not come from runtime detection or dynamic reconfiguration. It comes from…

Do you have any constructive feedback on how I can fix it?

Re: Linux Kernel Explorer

#90

Post by reverserdev »

bakugo wrote: post #75
reverserdev wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you please elaborate what exactly is the problem with the first sentence? "The kernel isn't a process—it's the system. It serves user processes, reacts to context, and enforces separation and control." This is actually based on "The Kernel in The Mind" by Moon Hee Lee. You are welcome to provide feedback.

Is it or is it not AI generated? That's all I said, and you didn't deny it.

Focus! Whether it's AI generated or not is a form of ad hominem. Attack the content, not how it came to be.
Post reply on HN