On Tue, 20 Jan 2015 09:13:59 +0800
> That's because people have not done anything really needing performance
> on the desktop over D-Bus in the past due to how slow the current
> implementation is.
The desktop is a performance critical environment, even though certain
desktop developers think 2GB
[Bother. Futzed Daniel Mack's email address. Resending]
On 01/16/2015 08:16 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> kdbus is a kernel-level IPC implementation that aims for resemblance to
> the the protocol layer with the existing userspace D-Bus daemon while
> enabling some features that couldn't be impl
On 01/20/2015 02:24 PM, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 07:26:09PM +0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:57:12AM +0100, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
>>> My guess is that the people porting from QNX were just confused
>>> and their use of D-Bus was in err
On 01/16/2015 08:16 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> kdbus is a kernel-level IPC implementation that aims for resemblance to
> the the protocol layer with the existing userspace D-Bus daemon while
> enabling some features that couldn't be implemented before in userspace.
>
> The documentation in th
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 07:26:09PM +0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:57:12AM +0100, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> >
> > So I did some googling and found in QNX servers create a channel
> > to receive messages, and clients connect to this channel.
> > Multiple clients can
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:57:12AM +0100, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 09:13:59AM +0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:38:12AM +0100, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> > > Those automotive applications you
> > > were talking about, what was the OS they
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 09:13:59AM +0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:38:12AM +0100, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> > Those automotive applications you
> > were talking about, what was the OS they were ported from
> > and what was the messaging API they used?
>
> They were
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:38:12AM +0100, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 04:31:55AM +0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 09:19:06PM +0100, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> > > These two statements somehow contradict. From my admittedly very
> > > limited ex
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 04:31:55AM +0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 09:19:06PM +0100, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> > These two statements somehow contradict. From my admittedly very
> > limited experience, I never used D-Bus because it did not
> > fit my usage scenarios: I
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 09:19:06PM +0100, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 02:38:06AM +0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > Yes, I do agree, there are lots of existing ipc solutions today that
> > kdbus is not designed for, nor would it be good to use it for. The
> > majority of
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 02:38:06AM +0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> Yes, I do agree, there are lots of existing ipc solutions today that
> kdbus is not designed for, nor would it be good to use it for. The
> majority of them being IPC that crosses the network layer, as there are
> lots of good s
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 07:06:42PM +0100, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> Hi Greg and Daniel,
[Fixing Daniel's email, which I messed up originally...]
> On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 11:16:04AM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > kdbus is a kernel-level IPC implementation that aims for resemblance to
> >
(resend, fix Daniel's email address)
Hi Greg and Daniel,
I don't have a clue so I need to ask some stupid questions...
On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 11:16:04AM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> kdbus is a kernel-level IPC implementation that aims for resemblance to
> the the protocol layer with the e
Hi Greg and Daniel,
I don't have a clue so I need to ask some stupid questions...
On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 11:16:04AM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> kdbus is a kernel-level IPC implementation that aims for resemblance to
> the the protocol layer with the existing userspace D-Bus daemon while
>
On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 7:26 PM, Daniel Mack wrote:
> Hi Josh,
>
> On 01/16/2015 11:18 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 05:07:25PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
>>> The code.google.com tree has commits
>>> from 2 days ago, but it still calls d_materialise_unique in fs.c
>>> wher
Hi Josh,
On 01/16/2015 11:18 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 05:07:25PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> The code.google.com tree has commits
>> from 2 days ago, but it still calls d_materialise_unique in fs.c
>> whereas the patchset you've posted uses the correct d_splice_alias
On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 05:07:25PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 2:16 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> wrote:
> > This can also be found in a git tree, the kdbus branch of char-misc.git at:
> > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/char-misc.git/
>
> Is this now
On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 2:16 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
wrote:
> This can also be found in a git tree, the kdbus branch of char-misc.git at:
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/char-misc.git/
Is this now the canonical tree? I ask because the github tree hasn't
been updated
18 matches
Mail list logo
