From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthias Fischer To: development@lists.ipfire.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] Parallelized build for several packages Date: Sat, 09 Mar 2019 21:36:10 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <002e01d4d6b6$18bf9e30$4a3eda90$@ipfire.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7941655352086106324==" List-Id: --===============7941655352086106324== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 09.03.2019 21:24, Wolfgang Apolinarski wrote: > Hi, >=20 > sorry, that I did not respond in time. I also had issues with "slang" during > one of my latest test builds, especially when using something like "-j3" (it > always worked fine when using higher values). > The lfs manual also stated that the build of "slang" cannot be parallelized. > Sorry, I apparently overlooked that (I have now checked all other packages > and did not find incompabilities). No problem, current 'next' - with commented $(MAKETUNING) for 'slang' - built= without problems. For the records: Last clean "Build finished in 7:02:45". Hardware: i7/2600, 8 GB RAM, 500GB SA= TA HDD, Ubuntu 18.04.2 LTS / 32bit (yes, I know... ;-) ). Best, Matthias > Today, I started again some more builds (with parallel build disabled for > slang), the test continues tomorrow. >=20 > Best regards, > Wolfgang > PS.: The builds always use the branch that Michael created. >=20 > -----Urspr=C3=BCngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Matthias Fischer =20 > Gesendet: Freitag, 8. M=C3=A4rz 2019 19:16 > An: Michael Tremer ; Wolfgang Apolinarski > > Cc: development(a)lists.ipfire.org > Betreff: Re: [PATCH 0/1] Parallelized build for several packages >=20 > Hi, >=20 > third try, now building current 'next', identical error: >=20 > 'slang 2.3.0' doesn't like "cd $(DIR_APP) && make $(MAKETUNING)" here. >=20 > After reverting > https://git.ipfire.org/?p=3Dipfire-2.x.git;a=3Dblob;f=3Dlfs/slang;h=3D217e7= 4c77317d4 > c829913f934458779fd278bf29;hb=3D23164efba5f57b3d8ccb07a166b613f2f951e1b6, > build continues... >=20 > Best, > Matthias >=20 > On 08.03.2019 16:58, Matthias Fischer wrote: >> Hi, >>=20 >> On 08.03.2019 11:17, Michael Tremer wrote: >>> Hi, >>>=20 >>> Are you guys still there? >>=20 >> Yep. ;-) >>=20 >> Your branch 'faster-build' refuses to build here - I get 'slang' errors: >>=20 >> ***SNIP*** >> cd /usr/src/slang-2.3.0 && make -j9 >> make[1]: Entering directory '/usr/src/slang-2.3.0' >> cd src; make elf >> make[2]: Entering directory '/usr/src/slang-2.3.0/src' >> /usr/src/slang-2.3.0/autoconf/mkinsdir.sh=20 >> /usr/src/slang-2.3.0/src/elfobjs cp sysconf.h config.h cp=20 >> terminfo/default.inc terminfo.inc cd /usr/src/slang-2.3.0/src/elfobjs=20 >> && gcc -c -O2 -pipe -Wall -fexceptions -fPIC -march=3Di586=20 >> -mindirect-branch=3Dthunk -mfunction-return=3Dthunk -mtune=3Dgeneric=20 >> -fomit-frame-pointer -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=3D2 -Wp,-D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS=20 >> -fstack-protector-strong -fPIC -Dunix -DSLANG =20 >> /usr/src/slang-2.3.0/src/sldisply.c >> cd /usr/src/slang-2.3.0/src/elfobjs && gcc -c -O2 -pipe -Wall=20 >> -fexceptions -fPIC -march=3Di586 -mindirect-branch=3Dthunk=20 >> -mfunction-return=3Dthunk -mtune=3Dgeneric -fomit-frame-pointer=20 >> -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=3D2 -Wp,-D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS=20 >> -fstack-protector-strong -fPIC -Dunix -DSLANG =20 >> /usr/src/slang-2.3.0/src/slutty.c cd /usr/src/slang-2.3.0/src/elfobjs=20 >> && gcc -c -O2 -pipe -Wall -fexceptions -fPIC -march=3Di586=20 >> -mindirect-branch=3Dthunk -mfunction-return=3Dthunk -mtune=3Dgeneric=20 >> -fomit-frame-pointer -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=3D2 -Wp,-D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS=20 >> -fstack-protector-strong -fPIC -Dunix -DSLANG =20 >> /usr/src/slang-2.3.0/src/slang.c >> /bin/sh: line 0: cd: /usr/src/slang-2.3.0/src/elfobjs: No such file or=20 >> directory mkdir -p -- /usr/src/slang-2.3.0/src/elfobjs >> make[2]: *** [Makefile:472:=20 >> /usr/src/slang-2.3.0/src/elfobjs/sldisply.o] Error 1 >> make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs.... >> /usr/src/slang-2.3.0/src/slang.c: In function 'inner_interp': >> /usr/src/slang-2.3.0/src/slang.c:5733:9: warning: 'test' may be used > uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized] >> if ((0 =3D=3D pop_int (&test)) >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> && (test =3D=3D 0)) >> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> /usr/src/slang-2.3.0/src/slang.c: In function 'lang_do_loops': >> /usr/src/slang-2.3.0/src/slang.c:3725:10: warning: 'blks[0]' may be used > uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized] >> block =3D blks[0]; >> ~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~ >> /usr/src/slang-2.3.0/src/slang.c:3924:7: warning: 'first' may be used > uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized] >> i +=3D ctrl; >> ~~^~~~~~~ >> /usr/src/slang-2.3.0/src/slang.c:3900:13: warning: 'last' may be used > uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized] >> if (i > last) break; >> ^ >> make[2]: Leaving directory '/usr/src/slang-2.3.0/src' >> make[1]: *** [Makefile:55: elf] Error 2 >> make[1]: Leaving directory '/usr/src/slang-2.3.0' >> make: *** [slang:74: /usr/src/log/slang-2.3.0] Error 2 >> ***SNAP*** >>=20 >> Don't know why. I tried two builds, same error. >>=20 >> Best, >> Matthias >>=20 >>> I think that we are saving about 30 min to an hour on the nightly builds > now=E2=80=A6 Did anybody else run some benchmarks? >>>=20 >>> -Michael >>>=20 >>>> On 6 Mar 2019, at 16:36, Michael Tremer > wrote: >>>>=20 >>>> Hi, >>>>=20 >>>> Sorry for not being able to get around to this earlier, but I have > invested some time on this: >>>>=20 >>>> First of all, I merged Wolfgang=E2=80=99s patch. He is right, the build = is too > slow. It sometimes looks a bit like it is not taking enough advantage of > fast systems. On the other hand with have small systems, which are (in their > own right) quite fast. Those are the ARM systems. They usually have 1G of > RAM. 2GB when you are lucky. >>>>=20 >>>> So I adjusted make.sh a little bit and removed composing the MAKETUNING > variable from it. >>>>=20 >>>> Now, make.sh only figures out the value that usually comes after the -j. > It is set in DEFAULT_PARALLELISM. >>>>=20 >>>> In the individual LFS files, we can now set a new variable called > MAX_PARALLELISM which is optional. In boost, I now calculate this from the > amount of memory that is available. That will make sure that we have a cap > on this that will be high on systems that have the memory and low on those > that don=E2=80=99t. Before, we hardcoded -j2 which of course runs very slow= on large > systems. >>>>=20 >>>> The code is here: >>>>=20 >>>> =20 >>>> https://git.ipfire.org/?p=3Dpeople/ms/ipfire-2.x.git;a=3Dshortlog;h=3Dre= fs >>>> /heads/faster-build >>>>=20 >>>> Please review. I am now running this on a couple of builders and will > see what comes out. Please do the same and send me feedback. >>>>=20 >>>> Best, >>>> -Michael >>>>=20 >>>>> On 21 Feb 2019, at 17:28, Wolfgang Apolinarski > wrote: >>>>>=20 >>>>> Hi Arne, >>>>>=20 >>>>> of course I did delete the ccache between my multiple builds to verify > the commit. To play it safe, I hard reset using git, checked that all > folders (build, ccache, etc.) are gone and restarted the build after > gettoolchain and downloadsrc. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Sorry, I did not know that there are still a lot of machines with low > ram that we are using to build ipfire. My hope was that these machines have > disappeared over the last years. >>>>> Additionally, I do not have the ability to test all ipfire arches, as > mentioned, the patch needs testing by others. >>>>>=20 >>>>> I also thought of adding a manual parameter for developers that somehow > manually sets the parameters for parallel build, but since the MAKETUNING > parameter already exists and is used with other packages this would just > somehow mess everything up. >>>>>=20 >>>>> For my builds, I can just manually apply the patch to speed up the full > build. My thought was that sharing the patch would make sense for others. >>>>>=20 >>>>>> -----Urspr=C3=BCngliche Nachricht----- >>>>>> Von: Arne Fitzenreiter >>>>>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 21. Februar 2019 09:44 >>>>>> An: Wolfgang Apolinarski >>>>>> Cc: development(a)lists.ipfire.org >>>>>> Betreff: Re: [PATCH 0/1] Parallelized build for several packages >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> On the most of this packages (eg. boot and cmake) i have disabled=20 >>>>>> parallel build because it fails on machines with low ram (less=20 >>>>>> than 2GB) or on arm. >>>>>> So such changes need tested on an 1GB machine, on all=20 >>>>>> architectures and build two times after deleting ccache. Because=20 >>>>>> the build need much lower resources if it has the file already > prebuilt in cache. --===============7941655352086106324==--