On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 16:34:09 +0100
Carsten Munk <[email protected]> wrote:

> 2011/3/14  <[email protected]>:
> > Hi,
> >
> >  I was taking a quick look at the apps on MeeGo images. It seems
> > that none of the current apps utilize launcher (booster) for
> > improving the startup time. Previously, I've seen that using
> > launcher can improve startup time of meego touch based apps 1-2s, I
> > do not know yet how much the improvement would be on N900. There is
> > also no memory penalty in using launcher, it may even save some
> > memory. Prestarting is different thing.
> >
> >  Please see: http://apidocs.meego.com/git-tip/mtf/launcher.html on
> > more info about the launcher.
> >
> >  BTW; This might be EasyFix improvement in some of the app cases,
> > where apps code is simple.
> >
> 
> I think that it is more than an EasyFix - there's the 'catch' the
> applications are made such that they derive their 'main' class from
> MAppplication such as DialerApplication. And booster can't instiatiate
> subclasses.
> 
> We had a conversation regarding this at some point in an e-mail
> exchange, Arun has been working with it and Pertti Kellomäki and had
> this to say:
> 
> "I'm afraid that if you inherit from MApplication, then you cannot
> really use the meegotouch booster. The booster process creates an
> MApplication, and there is no way to turn it into an SmsApplication
> after the fact. My hunch is that the other problems you are seeing may
> be related to this.
> 
> That said, you could still get some benefits (e.g. shared library
> loading) by using the qt booster. Using the booster also helps in
> saving system memory by sharing memory copy-on-write between
> processes." (Pertti)

It was also my understanding that the booster/pre-launch combo was also
really only of benifit to ARM, since the IA platform can efficiently
use PMIC ... though I confess this is not an area of expertise for me.

My point is, if it helps ARM but hurts IA, then it's a non-starter.
Likewise, if it helps IA and hurts ARM, I suspect the same is true.  We
really need to find appropriate mechanisms that work well across
architectures, or clear documentation on how to re-write apps in a
manner that allows them to be conditionally compiled per arch, if it
makes sense to do so.

> As well as Shane mentioning the change from DialerApplication to a
> DialerContext of sorts would be quite an invasive change to the
> current code and possibly conflict with efforts to make Dialer
> headless.

Lets take another look at this once Arun and Michael sort out the
current "headless" re-architecture that is currently underway,OK?

Shane...
_______________________________________________
MeeGo-handset mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-handset

Reply via email to