Starting the kdbus discussions

[Greg KH]

On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 02:15:40PM -0800, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On sexta-feira, 10 de janeiro de 2014 13:55:36, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 01:47:33PM -0800, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > > On sexta-feira, 27 de dezembro de 2013 01:04:19, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > > > Heya,
> > > > 
> > > > We today reached a milestone in kdbus development, that we have all the
> > > > bits in pieces in place to boot a full system with kdbus as system bus
> > > > and no dbus-daemon in the mix for it. The only missing bit is policy
> > > > enforcement, everything else is there.
> > > 
> > > Hi Lennart
> > > 
> > > Do you have any performance benchmarks done already? We're all technical
> > > here and we understand the new architecture improvements are worth it,
> > > but have you measured them?
> > 
> > What would you recommend as a "real-world" dbus benchmark to try out?
> 
> I'm just wondering if you've done this exercise already. I'm getting the 
> question from some people interested in kdbus who are wondering what the 
> benefit is. I was looking for a starting point.

Speed isn't the main benefit, see all of the other comments about why
this work was done for those reasons.  But, it will be nice if it is
faster.  I have heard reports of orders-of-magnitude speed increases on
some workloads / benchmarks, but as I've never run them, and everyone's
processor / system / workload for dbus is different, I encourage others
to run their own tests if they really care about dbus performance
issues.

Hint, almost no one cares about dbus performance, except people with
really underpowered processors abusing dbus for things it was never
originally intended to do.

If anyone wants to post their numbers and the tests they ran, it would
be great to see them.

thanks,

greg k-h