Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote:
Mitch Bradley wrote:
The processor on OLPC is inherently slower than the processors that are used in modern laptops. To get ultra low power you have to sacrifice something. It seems unlikely that we would be able to hide that inherent speed differential by a kernel change. In the short term, I don't know of any planned hardware changes that would substantially increase the performance of file system activity on USB drives.


Ok, this is the kind of feedback I was looking for. What about the internal flash? Is it going to be substantially faster than USB drives?
I wouldn't count on it being enough faster to make a huge difference in the case you are investigating. I expect that the process is mostly CPU-bound. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but the kernel buffer cache is probably preventing most of those failed opens from having to re-access the USB hardware.

You could test that easily; just create/mount a tmpfs (RAM-resident) directory and try your script on it.
I believe that "work smarter" is a key component of the OLPC plan. It looks like you have found some "low-hanging fruit" that is ripe for the picking. Improving pygtk to start up in a less "brute force" way would benefit not only OLPC, but everybody else as well.

Definitely. But it's also important to prioritize the work. The whole point of this mail is to figure out how critical the "opening a bunch of files" issues is going to be on the final hardware/kernel.
The current hardware and kernel is a reasonable model for the speed of the final system. We'll certainly make some improvements to the core performance of the low-level system, but it won't be an order of magnitude*. So order of magnitude speedups will have to come from avoiding unnecessary work, rather than depending on the system to be so fast that waste doesn't matter.

*I am, however, confident that we can make huge improvements in the stability.

Thanks,
Marco


_______________________________________________
Sugar mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.laptop.org/mailman/listinfo/sugar

Reply via email to