[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       busybox
Subject:    less Idle time with busybox ash as bash vs bash
From:       James Hanley <jhanley () dgtlrift ! com>
Date:       2018-08-31 18:06:10
Message-ID: CAF++6APhMxRAc+0gEr9OA3usyPOQdBpNtaZ4K6ksV2saOXrPvw () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

We had some bash scripts that we converted to use busybox ash as bash
(removed any array constructs) and when comparing the two scripts - it
seems that running them under busybox yields less idle time compared
to bash.

I was expecting that busybox would (itself) take up more time simply
because of vfork, but yield more CPU time overall since there would be
less overhead as a number of the applets would not fork&exec.

Is this expected behavior that busybox overall yields less idle time?
-Jim
_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
busybox@busybox.net
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]