From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [207.164.182.72] (helo=smtp.cbnco.com) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MUOwN-0007Ll-MW for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 24 Jul 2009 19:52:19 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.cbnco.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C367651A7EC for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2009 13:37:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtp.cbnco.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.cbnco.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 20076-01 for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2009 13:37:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [172.20.22.83] (auriga-dmzgw.cbnco.com [207.164.182.65]) by smtp.cbnco.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9F18C4F526C for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2009 13:37:56 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4A69F174.3020006@cbnco.com> Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 13:37:56 -0400 From: Michael Smith User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090605) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org References: <1248201134.26475.15.camel@dax.rpnet.com> <200907232141.13597.khimov@altell.ru> <1248386615.14790.43.camel@dax.rpnet.com> <200907240900.52746.khimov@altell.ru> <1248454154.20755.13.camel@dax.rpnet.com> In-Reply-To: <1248454154.20755.13.camel@dax.rpnet.com> X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at cbnco.com Subject: Re: [Bitbake-dev] Bitbake runqueue performance improvement X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 17:52:19 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Richard Purdie wrote: > Is there any other feedback on the bitbake patch? For me, it makes preparing the runqueue at least twice as fast (from ~2 to ~1 second for a small console image, ~14 to ~6 for something with X11). My task dependencies look identical before and after the patch, except for the new harmless .do_rootfs -> .do_package_write_deb,do_populate_staging that you wrote about at the start of the thread. Now if only "Resolving any missing task queue dependencies" were a little faster :) That part's running about 40 seconds for me on a large image. Mike