From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
"Bernhard M. Wiedemann" <bwiedemann@suse.de>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs: Build kernel docs deterministically
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2024 22:19:59 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87o751oqlc.fsf@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87wmjqndyk.fsf@intel.com>
On Thu, 05 Sep 2024, Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Sep 2024, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> wrote:
>> Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com> writes:
>>
>>>> However my patch for sphinx -j1 did give good test results, too.
>>>> Maybe in your case that would result in 8 sphinx calls with 1 thread
>>>> each, which would be more appropriate for your machine.
>>>
>>> The right thing to do is to have one sphinx-build process and pass -j<N>
>>> to that.
>>
>> [I wouldn't have minded being CC'd on this conversation...]
>
> Yes, sorry about that.
>
>> I, too, have never seen the behavior Jani reports.
>>
>> I, too, would like to get rid of as much of the makefile hackery as
>> possible, but it all did end up there for a reason.
>>
>> The business around parallelism was intended to make sphinx play well
>> with other targets being built in the same make invocation. If you do a
>> "make -j8 this that theother htmldocs" and there are five processes
>> working on this, that, and theother, then sphinx should not create more
>> than three. See 51e46c7a4007 for more.
>>
>> In Jani's case, it sounds like the job-slot reservation isn't working
>> right somehow?
>
> Looking at the -j<N> results on an unrelated project, PEBKAC is a
> distinct possibility here, and this part may be a red herring. I'll need
> to look into it.
And just so there's no confusion, this is purely about my comments. The
problem with reproducible builds Bernhard presents is still a problem.
One of the key questions is whether we end up launching multiple
sphinx-build processes ourselves (but maybe some other way than I
speculated), making this a duplicate of [1], or whether plain single
sphinx-build -j<N> on its own *also* has parallel build issues. And if
the latter, can they be caused by our extensions incorrectly indicating
parallel_read_safe = True or parallel_write_safe = True in their setup()
functions, or is it something inherently in Sphinx.
BR,
Jani.
[1] https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/issues/2946
--
Jani Nikula, Intel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-05 19:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-05 11:35 [PATCH] docs: Build kernel docs deterministically bernhard+linux-doc
2024-09-05 12:04 ` Jani Nikula
2024-09-05 12:20 ` Jani Nikula
2024-09-05 13:29 ` Vegard Nossum
2024-09-05 14:08 ` Jani Nikula
2024-09-05 14:50 ` Vegard Nossum
2024-09-05 12:57 ` Bernhard M. Wiedemann
2024-09-05 13:07 ` Jani Nikula
2024-09-05 18:01 ` Jonathan Corbet
2024-09-05 18:38 ` Jani Nikula
2024-09-05 19:19 ` Jani Nikula [this message]
2024-09-06 13:43 ` Bernhard M. Wiedemann
2024-09-06 9:11 ` Vegard Nossum
2024-09-06 13:56 ` Bernhard M. Wiedemann
2024-09-06 14:53 ` Akira Yokosawa
2024-09-20 7:01 ` [PATCH] docs/zh_TW+zh_CN: Make rst references unique bernhard+linux-doc
2024-09-23 5:36 ` Yanteng Si
2024-10-07 17:23 ` Jonathan Corbet
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87o751oqlc.fsf@intel.com \
--to=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bwiedemann@suse.de \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mchehab@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).