On samedi 5 juin 2021 16:29:10 CEST Volker Krause wrote: > Do KIO slaves still need the klauncher/kinit loading mechanism?
No. My request for developers to test KIO_FORK_SLAVES=1 for daily use is so that apps fork kio worker processes directly, without going via klauncher/kinit. BTW it seems to work fine. I wonder if we should toggle that in 5.84, as part of the incremental move to the KF6 world. > or could > that be replaced by json metadata based plugin loading as well? Err, that's an orthogonal question. When not going via klauncher/kinit, the app first launches the kioslave5 process, which then loads the .so with the kio worker plugin. As you can see from your process list: PREFIX/lib64/libexec/kf5/kioslave5 PREFIX/lib64/plugins/kf5/kio/file.so file local:/run/user/1000/kded5ymjnPa.3.slave-socket That .so is determined by slave.cpp using QString lib_path = KPluginLoader::findPlugin(_name); which I believe means it finds the plugin by filename, no .protocol file needed and no json metadata needed, right? > - is the performance benefit of kinit still relevant there? We decided it wasn't. For KIO workers it was never measured anyway. > - for in-process KIO that would be needed anyway That would remove the separate process (kioslave5) from the equation but that's unrelated to plugin loading. -- David Faure, fa...@kde.org, http://www.davidfaure.fr Working on KDE Frameworks 5