On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 06:31:37PM +0100, Martin Sperl wrote: > On 08.11.2013, at 17:19, Mark Brown wrote:
> > I'd want to see strong numbers from a real use case showing that the > > complexity of trying to do this was worth it. > I remember having shared all sorts on values in my earlier posts > regarding to absolute measurements. > * from CPU utilization to receive 3000 CAN messages/s > * to latency perspective (interrupt to SPI Message) > * to time spent "preparing" a message. This sounds like an artificial benchmark attempting to saturate the bus rather than a real world use case, as does everything else you mention, and the contributions of the individual changes aren't broken down so it isn't clear what specifically the API change delivers. I'd like to see both a practical use case and specific analysis showing that changing the API is delivering a benefit as opposed to the parts which can be done by improving the implementation of the current API.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
