On Thu, 2023-12-14 at 18:28 +0100, Alexander Kanavin wrote: > On Thu, 14 Dec 2023 at 15:39, Richard Purdie > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I not entirely happy about this since start_worker() executes processes > > and isn't trivial. The code is careful enough to tear them down too at > > exit but it is all a bit of a waste of time. > > > > I had wondered if we can create RunQueueExecute() without the workers > > but as the code stands, it does poke things into them in a small > > isolated section. I think this code flow should be tweaked to stop > > RunQueueExecute needing the workers to be started and that would be a > > decent cleanup of the code anyway. > > > > I can take a look at that if it helps since I think I've been moving > > towards that refactor for a while anyway? > > Yes please. I haven't noticed any regression in printdiff performance, > other than a couple of additional lines printed, but if you can make a > better patch, that'd be welcome.
Patch on the bitbake list for this which removes more code than it adds. We had already set everything up to do this :) > Meanwhile I'd like to implement what I mentioned in note (1) in patch > 4/9, as it's a real regression that I realized only today as I was > preparing the patchset for submission and now it's bothering me :) Yes, it is and I do agree we need to fix that. Cheers, Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#192533): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/192533 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/103169696/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
