Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 53

Thread: Bringing D-Bus Into The Linux Kernel

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1

    Default

    Quote 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!

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    141

    Default

    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.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    82

    Default

    Quote 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...

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    13

    Default

    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?

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,333

    Default

    @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.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    2,153

    Default

    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.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    47

    Default

    Quote 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.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,801

    Default

    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.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut,USA
    Posts
    983

    Default

    Quote 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

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut,USA
    Posts
    983

    Default

    Quote 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.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •