1. 92
  1.  

  2. 11

    Good read and great improvement. Also an interesting real world user test of email based git workflows.

    1. 11

      Original post: https://linus.schreibt.jetzt/posts/qemu-9p-performance.html

      I love the clickbait title. QEMU always makes me click.

      1. 4

        Glad lobste.rs is here to take that with a bit of humour!

        To nitpick: neither one is really “canonical” or “original”, one is just my employer’s blog and the other is my own :)

        1. 4

          Your blog is way more readable :D

      2. 7

        Good read, thanks for sharing.

        1. 5

          I too encountered this bug, thank you so much for fixing it!

          1. 4

            Nice fix! Glad to see I wasn’t the only one to mess up Qemu’s patch submission process on the first attempt.

            Now I just need to figure out how their automated testing and CI works, because the simple act of forking the repo on GitHub instantly chewed through my entire free Actions allowance, and I’d actually like to write and run tests for the next bunch of patches I’ve written. (Standards conformity fixes in the USB mass storage device, perf improvements to the macOS Hypervisor.framework back-end.)

            1. 1

              I was wondering why file access when testing NixOS configs in a VM was so slow. Great to see this addressed!