From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr1-f66.google.com (mail-wr1-f66.google.com [209.85.221.66]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A0E275546 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2018 01:11:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wr1-f66.google.com with SMTP id h14-v6so15745949wrw.13 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 18:11:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=L5763iNDVVvHRIYrUPZcHw5NrR1hGuNlZuAXxIx75xc=; b=Aae5ElMIZTO7GlnVOfmDjD7abem6U9uheJm9x2GNjqwdK87oig7590Ko1N5fpiVgoU gKIc7git1FxOO7BvDW24ZVlGuwOfAh2fbbbNv5YwH4DdhHaZr1CxNSji8AiNzfif216D ByzEtja7oosHtLTYWzWxCRWWunuSquvRBFPVaADJP0s+jkjv9r0mnzocvgDajO3OvpHx 44AULLrlNNWoncwNu0jsrR2fTykKso5BK+RLSZhBUbPy/BvtZMY8BuhKW9Pke7j7XmWZ gwwtsdfMKNL6k6zN4dEQBoij5Hcc90k22b5WTI5nIfkNu3rtt36zUJRm9WOoNo7y8n+W 40Vg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=L5763iNDVVvHRIYrUPZcHw5NrR1hGuNlZuAXxIx75xc=; b=PHtMP0iQntFQDMb7pgrQ3pXoOr8qc2KxlbPMrXBWY1laslDI7YtDYgo7yJLu7Mz0AN 43E/N8WIfrzNKdsA0iiKFoZZSu/rj6knMPshN7EpqtbZHLGCyjZwMsBBB9llOkOREfBH ElYBGkiZE4B5Krk9oEsb9yS1N+OMsnLfuml6RP7xKnY/NHehMLNkPO3t7OoCEJpM0lO1 aOaLQBvCyPTAd46O8CSz+jSUmlyc7lHhzqkEpUiVGGgfgDpEDPturIOOXP8EVxZ13/IO OGWhQ3j9h1jIiOL77khWZn0E6h/hs81pWitrnLOoA+kV7368z+X+ltr+nUWQwGfroxGa 4+ag== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlGqthU7t2uKgIdEy2oOAejJrLXjGSTB3DiMJ1jBvlGVT/ZkL8og P+F0WLuyjPXhmi1exqL21Zw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPw3E/2cYzCpU4R2Y71NzI9X+ivI0eN/STLSUe1l+woIwzS//LKRgQpwR614Yk+Ae6SSVy9JYQ== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:63c1:: with SMTP id c1-v6mr11863646wrw.106.1534209074915; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 18:11:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([217.30.68.212]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m68-v6sm26292283wmb.10.2018.08.13.18.11.13 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Mon, 13 Aug 2018 18:11:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Martin Jansa X-Google-Original-From: Martin Jansa Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2018 03:11:19 +0200 To: Alexander Kanavin Message-ID: <20180814011119.GA1391@jama> References: <20180813210445.32496-1-schnitzeltony@gmail.com> <20180813210445.32496-3-schnitzeltony@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Cc: bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] runqueue: Introduce load balanced task spawning X-BeenThere: bitbake-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussion that advance bitbake development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2018 01:11:14 -0000 X-Groupsio-MsgNum: 9493 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="k+w/mQv8wyuph6w0" Content-Disposition: inline --k+w/mQv8wyuph6w0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 11:20:50PM +0200, Alexander Kanavin wrote: > 2018-08-13 23:04 GMT+02:00 Andreas M=FCller : > > To get most out of build host, bitbake now detects if the CPU workload = is low. > > If so, additional tasks are spawned. Maximum 'dynamic' tasks are set by > > BB_NUMBER_THREADS_LOW_CPU. >=20 > So the best improvement is going from 114.5 minutes to 113.5 minutes? > I don't think it's worth the trouble. Maybe it's time to invest in 16 > (or even 32!) core amd threadripper? :) IMHO the best improvement was for 3 BB_NUMBER_THREADS and possibly even bigger improvement for 2 BB_NUMBER_THREADS. > 2 | 156m48.741s > ------------------------------------ > 3 | 126m27.426s > ------------------------------------ =2E.. > With the patch applied and BB_NUMBER_THREADS_LOW_CPU =3D "20" (as > written in docs > for max thread count) >=20 > BB_NUMBER_THREADS | Build time [s] > ------------------------------------ > 3 | 114m48.105s I'm running with 2 BB_NUMBER_THREADS on similar HW (8core Bulldozer FX(tm)-8120, 32GB ram), because it leaves the desktop usable for other stuff while some build is running on background. With 4 BB_NUMBER_THREADS, big build and a bit of bad luck I was getting 4 do_compile tasks like qtbase, chromium, firefox and gimp at the same time which either makes me drink too much coffee or even invites uncle OOMK. I quite like the idea behind BB_NUMBER_THREADS_LOW_CPU. --=20 Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com --k+w/mQv8wyuph6w0 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EARECAB0WIQRU+ejDffEzV2Je2oc3VSO3ZXaAHAUCW3IsNgAKCRA3VSO3ZXaA HOHNAJ4usn2DtJLs4BJRzNtzm2t88u/oNQCfZswbp0SifIaxXcpgKbWzLRHqiWs= =zAaZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --k+w/mQv8wyuph6w0--