kde-core-devel@kde.org
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Review Request: Delay initialization of PowerDevil and DeviceAutomou

Subject: Re: Review Request: Delay initialization of PowerDevil and DeviceAutomounter
From: "Sebastian Sauer"
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 09:55:52 -0000

> On 2010-03-22 09:28:26, Lubos Lunak wrote:
> > Why don't you change X-KDE-Kded-phase=1 to 2 instead of this?
> >

because;
1. they are not the same
2. the one does not exclude the other

So, you suggest to additionally change them both from X-KDE-Kded-phase=1 to 
X-KDE-Kded-phase=2? Sounds good for me :)


- Sebastian


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviewboard.kde.org/r/3331/#review4605
-----------------------------------------------------------


On 2010-03-21 17:49:17, Sebastian Sauer wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://reviewboard.kde.org/r/3331/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated 2010-03-21 17:49:17)
> 
> 
> Review request for kdelibs and Dario Freddi.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> The patch delays the initialization of PowerDevil and DeviceAutomounter and 
> improves that way KDED startup phase 1 by close to a second (out of 15, 
> coldstart).
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   trunk/KDE/kdebase/runtime/solid-device-automounter/kded/DeviceAutomounter.h 
> 1105732 
>   
> trunk/KDE/kdebase/runtime/solid-device-automounter/kded/DeviceAutomounter.cpp 
> 1105732 
>   trunk/KDE/kdebase/workspace/powerdevil/daemon/PowerDevilDaemon.h 1105732 
>   trunk/KDE/kdebase/workspace/powerdevil/daemon/PowerDevilDaemon.cpp 1105732 
> 
> Diff: http://reviewboard.kde.org/r/3331/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Sebastian
> 
>

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>