Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bringing D-Bus Into The Linux Kernel

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    What the hell is the point, other than a small gain for Maemo devices?

    Kill it! Kill it with fire!
    With plasma fire you mean. And all the devs who had this idea. Then spread the dust through space and lets never talk about it again!

    Comment


    • #12
      Why would this benefit performance exactly? What sort of overhead is intrinsically connected to user-space code (i.e. most of the code you run) aside from the few cycles required to switch x86 into protected mode? If there's that much to be gained by moving stuff into the kernel then I'd call that a design flaw elsewhere having nothing to do with dbus.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by fabiank22 View Post
        Uhhmm... KDE?
        Actually I'm only seeing a handful of messages per minute on the session bus (and almost none on the system bus), mostly kwin activations and kopete stuff.
        I'm surprised that dbus can actually become a bottleneck...

        Comment


        • #14
          Step 1: design Yet Another Ugly and Overengineered IPC System (YAUOIS)
          Step 2: move it to the kernel to overcome the problems caused by bad design decisions.

          Seriously, I doubt this will be accepted. Android is already trying to push in their own (YAUOIS)...how many of the do we need? Can't D-Bus use the Android crap?

          Comment


          • #15
            @diegocg

            Definitely. You forgot step 1.5: Make it Yet Another Daemon.

            So that people who just want to pass messages can get more resource usage, always there for you, up and running.

            Comment


            • #16
              A 1.12x increase in performance is nothing to laugh at. Linux sucks in power consumption compared to Windows or Mac OS X and every bit that helps bridge that gap is a good thing in my book.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by diegocg View Post
                Step 1: design Yet Another Ugly and Overengineered IPC System (YAUOIS)
                Step 2: move it to the kernel to overcome the problems caused by bad design decisions.
                Oh yeah, what exactly is "ugly" and "Overengineered"? Do you have any idea how D-Bus works or have developed with it at all? D-Bus was created to adress real problems(e.g. DCOP being old and not up to the task anymore), and also has been around for a while now. There's a freedesktop spec and all.

                Secondly those are not "bad design decisions", D-Bus was created with KDE/The Desktop in mind, not with embedded systems. My normal CPU can handle the (small) overhead, but ARM/Snapdragon-Phones and devices?

                Also Power Consumption is a good point, Kernel Space = less wakeup calls due to context switching. This is Computer Science 101.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Let's move Firefox into the kernel too. I can post benchmarks then showing how faster it is. While we're at it, move everything into the kernel. A distro then consists of a 20GB vmlinuz kernel image. It will be very fast, I guarantee it, since everything is in the kernel.

                  Of course, in order to do updates, you have to update the whole kernel. But who gives a fsck? They did it with drivers. Let's do it with everything else too.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by curaga View Post
                    Ewww. D-Bus itself is completely unnecessary, keep that thing out of the kernel.
                    Agreed, that would bring a lot of bugs plus more work for the kernel devs to keep up with it. The more crap you bring into the kernel the more bloated it will be

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by fabiank22 View Post
                      Oh yeah, what exactly is "ugly" and "Overengineered"? Do you have any idea how D-Bus works or have developed with it at all? D-Bus was created to adress real problems(e.g. DCOP being old and not up to the task anymore), and also has been around for a while now. There's a freedesktop spec and all.

                      Secondly those are not "bad design decisions", D-Bus was created with KDE/The Desktop in mind, not with embedded systems. My normal CPU can handle the (small) overhead, but ARM/Snapdragon-Phones and devices?

                      Also Power Consumption is a good point, Kernel Space = less wakeup calls due to context switching. This is Computer Science 101.
                      DCOP is a KDE thing not a general userspace message bus and definitely old and has reached its limits, thus dbus was born. Also Gnome just started using dbus as well so it isn't just a KDE thing now any longer and it has gotten the same benefits as KDE did.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X