From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] validate_abi: build faster by augmenting
	make with job count
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 22:15:28 +0200
Message-ID: <7923871.JAtBDztydg@xps13>
References: <1469034588-1847-1-git-send-email-nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
 <20160720174849.GE28844@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
 <CDB4778C-5EF7-4728-A77D-229F76A13225@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: Neil Horman <nhorman@redhat.com>, Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>,
 dev@dpdk.org, "Mcnamara, John" <john.mcnamara@intel.com>
To: "Wiles, Keith" <keith.wiles@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wm0-f50.google.com (mail-wm0-f50.google.com [74.125.82.50])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C64A2BA2
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 20 Jul 2016 22:15:31 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-wm0-f50.google.com with SMTP id o80so84496963wme.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 20 Jul 2016 13:15:31 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CDB4778C-5EF7-4728-A77D-229F76A13225@intel.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

2016-07-20 19:47, Wiles, Keith:
> On Jul 20, 2016, at 12:48 PM, Neil Horman <nhorman@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 07:40:49PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> >> 2016-07-20 13:09, Neil Horman:
> >>> From: Neil Horman <nhorman@redhat.com>
> >>> +if [ -z "$MAKE_JOBS" ]
> >>> +then
> >>> +	# This counts the number of cpus on the system
> >>> +	MAKE_JOBS=`lscpu -p=cpu | grep -v "#" | wc -l`
> >>> +fi
> >> 
> >> Is lscpu common enough?
> >> 
> > I'm not sure how to answer that.  lscpu is part of the util-linux package, which
> > is part of any base install.  Theres a variant for BSD, but I'm not sure how
> > common it is there.
> > Neil
> > 
> >> Another acceptable default would be just "-j" without any number.
> >> It would make the number of jobs unlimited.
> 
> I think the best is just use -j as it tries to use the correct number of jobs based on the number of cores, right?

No Keith, -j alone use as much jobs as it can create, i.e. much more than
the number of CPUs.
I have no measure but I remember it is less efficient than giving a number
based on available CPUs (with a multiply factor to avoid idling between jobs).
For a default value, both approaches are fine.