Re: [GIT PULL] kdbus for 4.1-rc1

David Lang
2015-04-28T17:19:58Z

On Tue, 28 Apr 2015, Havoc Pennington wrote:

> btw if I can make a suggestion, it's quite confusing to talk about
> "dbus" unqualified when we are talking about implementation issues,
> since it muddles bus daemon vs. clients, and also since there are lots
> of implementations of the client bindings:
>
> http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/DBusBindings/
>
> For the bus daemon, the only two implementations I know of are the
> original one (which uses libdbus as its binding) and kdbus, though.
>
> I would expect there's no question the bus daemon can be faster, maybe
> say 1.5x raw sockets instead of 2.5x, or whatever - something on that
> order. Should probably simply stipulate this for discussion purposes:
> "someone could optimize the crap out of the bus daemon". The kdbus
> question is about whether to eliminate this daemon entirely.

As I'm seeing things, we aren't talking about 1.5x vs 2.5x, we're talking about
1000x

If the examples that are being used to show the performance advantage of kdbus
vs normal dbus are doing the wrong thing, then we need to get some other
examples available to people who don't live and breath dbus that 'so things
right' so that the kernel developers can see what you think is the real problem
and how kdbus addresses it.

So far, this 'wrong' example is the only thing that's been posted to show the
performance advantage of kdbus.

David Lang