Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Christopher Small 0001

dblp:s/ChristopherSmall · also Christopher Allen Small · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
6ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2005
0000-0002-9895-7278ORCID · verified

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Systems, architecture and hardware · 4 · 1 first-authorSoftware engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
2 papers
Processor architecture and microarchitecture · 67% Storage systems · 19% Memory systems · 14%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
4 papers
Operating systems · 100%

Topics — the 10 heaviest of 12, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Processor architecture and microarchitecture
chip multiprocessor
0.112005
Performance of Multithreaded Chip Multiprocessors and Implications for Operating System Design · USENIX ATC, General Track 2005
Processor architecture and microarchitecture › chip multiprocessor
multithreaded chip multiprocessors
0.112005
Performance of Multithreaded Chip Multiprocessors and Implications for Operating System Design · USENIX ATC, General Track 2005
Operating systems › operating system design
component-based operating system
0.011999
The Pebble Component-Based Operating System · USENIX ATC, General Track 1999
Storage systems
file systems
0.011999
Why does file system prefetching work? · USENIX ATC, General Track 1999
Memory systems › cache
prefetching
0.011999
Why does file system prefetching work? · USENIX ATC, General Track 1999
Operating systems › extensible operating systems
kernel extensibility
0.011996
Dealing with Disaster: Surviving Misbehaved Kernel Extensions · OSDI 1996
Operating systems › extensible operating systems › kernel extensibility › kernel extensions
safe kernel extensions
0.011996
Dealing with Disaster: Surviving Misbehaved Kernel Extensions · OSDI 1996
Storage systems › file systems
file system workload
0.011999
Why does file system prefetching work? · USENIX ATC, General Track 1999
Systems and software security › isolation
software fault isolation
0.011996
Dealing with Disaster: Surviving Misbehaved Kernel Extensions · OSDI 1996
Operating systems
resource management
0.011996
Dealing with Disaster: Surviving Misbehaved Kernel Extensions · OSDI 1996

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

software fault isolation · 0.0lightweight transactions · 0.0prefetching analysis · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2005 Falling Off the Cliff: When Systems Go Nonlinear
Yvonne Coady, Russ Cox, John DeTreville, Peter Druschel, Joseph L. Hellerstein, Andrew Hume, Kimberly Keeton, Christopher Small 0001, Lex Stein, Andy Warfield
HotOS9
2005 Performance of Multithreaded Chip Multiprocessors and Implications for Operating System Design
Alexandra Fedorova, Margo I. Seltzer, Christopher Small 0001, Daniel Nussbaum
USENIX ATC, General Track3
1999 The Pebble Component-Based Operating System
Eran Gabber, Christopher Small 0001, John L. Bruno, José Carlos Brustoloni, Avi Silberschatz
USENIX ATC, General Track2
1999 Why does file system prefetching work?
Elizabeth A. M. Shriver, Christopher Small 0001, Keith A. Smith
USENIX ATC, General Track2
1996 Dealing with Disaster: Surviving Misbehaved Kernel Extensions
abstract
Today’s extensible operating systems allow applications to modify kernel behavior by providing mechanisms for application code to run in the kernel address space. The advantage of this approach is that it provides improved application flexibility and performance; the disadvantage is that buggy or malicious code can jeopardize the integrity of the kernel. It has been demonstrated that it is feasible to use safe languages, software fault isolation, or virtual memory protection to safeguard the main kernel. However, such protection mechanisms do not address the full range of problems, such as resource hoarding, that can arise when application code is introduced into the kernel. In this paper, we present an analysis of extension mechanisms in the VINO kernel. VINO uses software fault isolation as its safety mechanism and a lightweight transaction system to cope with resource-hoarding. We explain how these two mechanisms are sufficient to protect against a large class of errant or malicious extensions, and we quantify the overhead that this protection introduces. We find that while the overhead of these techniques is high relative to the cost of the extensions themselves, it is low relative to the benefits that extensibility brings.
Margo I. Seltzer, Yasuhiro Endo, Christopher Small 0001, Keith A. Smith
OSDI3
1996 A Comparison of OS Extension Technologies
Christopher Small 0001, Margo I. Seltzer
USENIX ATC1