FTL: A new operating system for clouds

(ftl-os.org)

80 points | by romac 3 hours ago

16 comments

  • comboy 15 minutes ago
    I just make agents generate assembly for my app and my hardware and boot directly into that.
    • rfgplk 7 minutes ago
      Is this written in jest? Because it's very likely where the future of computing is heading. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZRE7HIO3vk; a lot of people were nagging on Casey because he implied that software was more efficient back when everyone "wrote their own kernel" and how "impossible it would be today". He even mentions how awesome it could be if every game came with it's own bootable USB. Now back then it truly was unthinkable, but today we're edging ever closer to that reality.

      For instance, I have a working microkernel written in a Lisp dialect for embedded devices. Compiled to native machine code. 100% LLM generated. ~70k loc. In benchmarks it outperforms most other embedded kernel projects by a significant margin. And it only took around ~$1500 in tokens (API costs all included).

      • smokel 2 minutes ago
        A problem with this approach is that it would put a large burden on the application developer (or development system) to support other devices (or services) than initially planned.

        Of course, it would be possible to add new drivers only when necessary, but that would also allow for security problems.

        So, in theory it might work, but in practice it would require quite a bit of thought.

  • drybjed 2 hours ago
    Is it just a hobby, and won't be big and professional like gnu?
    • trollbridge 43 minutes ago
      Only runs on 80386 since that’s all I have.
    • baron3dl 1 hour ago
      quick, let's find the author's shirtless beer drinking pictures before they get deleted
    • itsanaccount 2 hours ago
      I dont think the kids are gonna get the reference.
      • QuantumNomad_ 23 minutes ago
        I think they will. It’s a pretty famous quote, even among people who were not old enough to see it first-hand at the time when Linus made that Usenet post.
      • grimgrin 14 minutes ago
        thanks to your comment we all understood that you got it though, which is the point!

        also, thanks to your comment, unaware folks will probably figure it out, which is the subtler point!

  • sigbottle 1 hour ago
    What does "OS" for clouds mean?

    Does this mean you still delegate to something like KVM/paravirtualzation for your device models, but your FTL guest OS can run multiple secure workloads inside a VM?

    Or are you designing a custom OS from the ground up to run on native hardware? What constraints are you putting on hardware support to make this a tractable that's not re-implementing all of the stuff that linux has? I assume that's why it's advertised for the "cloud", because you know a priori the deployment machines you're gonna run on? Or is hardware support known by kernel devs to be a (relatively) trivial problem in the OS space, compared to the user-facing features (like processes, scheduling, memory management, etc)?

    Or is the bet that microkernel = win = can implement everything linux has and more?

    I'm curious about the eventual end goal for the project is, not just what currently exists (as otherwise the answer currently seems to be sentence 1)

  • ollybee 1 hour ago
    I saw FTL and "new" and got very excited. sadly is is not the game.
  • aaronbrethorst 28 minutes ago
    Here's the author: https://seiya.me -- he works at Vercel, sounds pretty legit.
  • trollbridge 40 minutes ago
    This is actually interesting, since most containers don’t actually need an independent kernel at all. Of course, this moves a container a lot closer to effectively being a chroot jail (but that’s a good thing) + having some capabilities taken away.
  • romac 3 hours ago
    FTL v0.1.0 was just released, adding async Rust support (multi-thread Tokio runtime) and lots of missing pieces in the Linux compatibility layer.

    (not my project)

  • tekacs 2 hours ago
    Sounds kinda like gVisor more than Unikraft? With a maybe-faster intercept path?
    • eranation 2 hours ago
      That was my first thought. I think adoption will increase if projects will have a clear FAQ about prior / related work, and not leave this to the reader (human or AI) to figure out.
    • convolvatron 1 hour ago
      I think it's a kind of like both? it runs as its own guest, but instead of implementing syscalls that are 1:1 with linux, it looks like linux runs as a library, and uses a different more pared down set to take a normal sys call path to the guest. so my guess is not cheaper at all, since instead of the gvisor syscall->vmexit for the common path, its maybe process->sys call to guest->vmexit to hypervisor.
  • yjftsjthsd-h 2 hours ago
    So it's a microkernel...ish? And it runs Linux programs and supports enough features to serve its own website. Excellent; I hope it takes off.
  • raggi 24 minutes ago
    parts of the kernel design remind me of zircon (handle oriented objects, vmo's, and so on), but then various lines are cut in different places (kernel knows of threads but not processes, maybe handles slightly higher level networking)
  • tamimio 19 minutes ago
    How’s this different from say openbalena?
  • dekdrop 1 hour ago
    written in rust, doesn't say written in rust on the site - i guess that phase is over
    • habitue 1 hour ago
      Now people just wonder why you didn't write it in rust
      • dexterdog 58 minutes ago
        Especially when you can just ask for that in your prompt
      • boredatoms 40 minutes ago
        I mean starting a new project in C or C++ does kinda need a defensible reason at this point, at least in any corporate environment
        • tkz1312 6 minutes ago
          I fully expect formally verified C to become the standard for any reasonably critical software. It's astonishing how easy it is to crank out program equivalence proofs these days...
        • rfgplk 13 minutes ago
          The real defensible reason is that with current tools available you can write perfectly safe (safer than Rust even) C++ code, while avoiding the horrid Rust compile times and without needing to pepper your code with unsafe all over the place. LLM's can help you formally verify your code and extensively fuzz/test it to the point where you can actually be sure (ie prove) that the code is safe, without really relying on Rusts compiler. Lastly, C++ lends itself more naturally to hardcore optimizations than Rust. But ultimately it really, _really_ comes down to a) Rust's horrid compile times and b) Rust's horrid metaprogramming support (this even kills it for LLM generated output because it wastes tokens).
  • mrtesthah 20 minutes ago
    MirageOS also bills itself as an OS in a library — is this similar?

    https://mirage.io/

    • monocasa 4 minutes ago
      Kind of, but this still has a kernel/user seperation, unlike mirage.

      This is really a classic exokernel design.

  • rvz 2 hours ago
    Maybe it is time to look at other new operating systems that are more memory safe by default and don't have any legacy bloat.

    Now that we have a KVM 0day + VM escape vulnerability [0] right now.

    [0] https://x.com/PaulosYibelo/status/2106378929158135903

  • IshKebab 2 hours ago
    Is this a unikernel? Your ASCII art diagram is broken.
    • monocasa 2 minutes ago
      It's an exokernel. It's kind of like if you modified a hypervisor specifically for running unikernels instead of classic VMs.
    • boguscoder 1 hour ago
      Fwiw diagram renders OKay in Brave on iOS
    • convolvatron 1 hour ago
      having looked at the briefly, is really a kernel that's meant to take system calls. I think the unikernel terminology is kinda broken. it's explicitly pared down to talk to a hypervisor rather than supporting a lot of hardware drivers. is a unikernel something you link in like a library? then its not. is a unikernel something that's intended to support a single process? then sure.
  • pmkary 1 hour ago
    What a nice thing!