Dnia 2010-09-20, pon o godzinie 11:32 +0100, Tilman Baumann pisze: > Patryk Benderz wrote: > > Dnia 2010-09-16, czw o godzinie 17:23 +0100, Al Johnson pisze: > >> kdbus is proof-of-concept at the moment, the idea being to reduce the > >> number > >> of context switches needed for each dbus message. One synthetic > >> benchmark > >> shows a 3x speed increase on the n900 but speedup in real world > >> applications > >> seems much more modest. > > > > There are a lot of complaints about Dbus IPC. That makes me wonder why > > people don't use one of already existing kernel IPCs [1][2] , and > > instead try to develop another one, which is not secure as I heard? > > [1] http://tldp.org/LDP/lpg/node7.html > > [2] http://tldp.org/LDP/tlk/ipc/ipc.html > > Actually, netlink comes to mind as a transport layer for something like dbus. > It can not all that dbus can, but most of those so called features are > actually a total wank anyway. At least it would scale. > But I suppose this discussion was lost when dbus was new and it is > pointless these days. Dbus will probably have a successor some day, and > with any luck it will have more sane foundations... > > Actually, dbus is not that bad. Some of the things it can do require a > approach like they took. Question is, should we have sacrificed those > features on the alter of simplicity? I'm not even sure I have a answer to > that... Nor do I. However I suppose Dbus should have been designed and built conforming to Unix Philosophy [1], and it seems it was not.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_philosophy -- Patryk "LeadMan" Benderz Linux Registered User #377521 () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments _______________________________________________ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community