From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on archive.lwn.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.7 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by archive.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2F2B7D90D for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 18:48:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726595AbfJJSse (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Oct 2019 14:48:34 -0400 Received: from ms.lwn.net ([45.79.88.28]:33022 "EHLO ms.lwn.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726387AbfJJSse (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Oct 2019 14:48:34 -0400 Received: from lwn.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E8F262BD; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 18:48:33 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 12:48:32 -0600 From: Jonathan Corbet To: Kees Cook Cc: Randy Dunlap , "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" , Mauro Carvalho Chehab Subject: Re: Sphinx parallel build errors Message-ID: <20191010124832.23bc4362@lwn.net> In-Reply-To: <201910091929.0C058BB@keescook> References: <201910091929.0C058BB@keescook> Organization: LWN.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 19:30:56 -0700 Kees Cook wrote: > I'm wondering if it's actually the addition of > the MAINTAINERS file parsing -- that's a really big parse and maybe that > pushed things over the edge? That does seem like a likely culprit, doesn't it? Watching a build here, though, I don't see that any one of the sphinx-build processes balloons to a horrific size, which is what I would expect if one file were causing the problem. In general, the sphinx build doesn't really begin to approach the memory requirements of, say, firefox or my mail client on my system. Randy, I'd be curious to know if you see the same behavior with current mainline. Also, can you see how many sphinx-build processes you have running? Thanks, jon