From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4AD6F15F3FB for ; Thu, 5 Sep 2024 18:38:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.14 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1725561499; cv=none; b=bPFTbrFJNjdIoPBwyEM5wWx4tz4FDTQddSN04Fm6ydYvfjnxHGPtBRnF6vn31UptrN71Tq+rZFlksxT5x+yDENbVpiU33f3i5C7r5z5v1BB/10CpzBGEjFt7frDpZBrVpjS4po0F2acT6P18v91oT8C9w/mnyVLw7Um0mFkUNIc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1725561499; c=relaxed/simple; bh=1JfP/XFFGmfPfhnMawDphPt9pvxCF+aNnm+8UBhY7q8=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=VCMJCoaj+OfZcquAgpky5jtuAmEiS0q+KCCnhK9LdeiaZstJFOUaJDnSR2zC0rapRwmrO7v7tDqdS91v2l5AJUNsL54v3JCO1BdE6FXVPFXj032Rk3IWeTHZaWxRLW/MPr500+isc14sBmV5bQ/W/jo9NOpg2F9ZwqznJFiMis4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=DVH5+8Dl; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.14 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="DVH5+8Dl" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1725561498; x=1757097498; h=from:to:subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id: mime-version; bh=1JfP/XFFGmfPfhnMawDphPt9pvxCF+aNnm+8UBhY7q8=; b=DVH5+8Dl/YRPHx/UrMoiZQx2rv9NmSb9ZD9lcN/CSQkL5GAgNnQXUI3A 45g8HYPjqHfPDl8uEJSi4dTdGKqQ+6bhwXxUwb14/MgPPBDiEHUF3aLt7 F0hPI67AKVp3PUiX6pqYm/KsDGBPNUQG+b9SuWMs+/6wmv9WDAsJW3QXS iJu36wzsXTkUDcqecwH13yYs5DbFfI2KCd6pvfQc6Nr0j1VyGlXaL640Y ENaMopR2D9wF6z3Hnk7M+AgawprQMVg1222zEpLYktvpJ8yDQvH/fMdRl xZU4aX7THq4nM6bv+dbzxi4wL3AYx8gfZubP7gcxmfQBk+Ifjy4DTUtJI Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 1tdmh1SvR1Gf+Tc0e/EZFg== X-CSE-MsgGUID: iFyAQa/6R2OPIU1t1uPkgg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11186"; a="28092763" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.10,205,1719903600"; d="scan'208";a="28092763" Received: from orviesa010.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.150]) by orvoesa106.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 05 Sep 2024 11:38:17 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: adt+VdcpQNqTfjjmbGbUgQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: yj/VuknFSBeKAfpeDaDtDg== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.10,205,1719903600"; d="scan'208";a="65541174" Received: from fdefranc-mobl3.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.245.246.216]) by orviesa010-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 05 Sep 2024 11:38:15 -0700 From: Jani Nikula To: Jonathan Corbet , "Bernhard M. Wiedemann" , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs: Build kernel docs deterministically In-Reply-To: <87ed5yj7ye.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo References: <20240905113531.65375-1-bernhard+linux-doc@lsmod.de> <878qw6qpbu.fsf@intel.com> <18f6aafd-3a96-42fc-9a65-b1b03ab8ae2a@suse.de> <87y146p7tp.fsf@intel.com> <87ed5yj7ye.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2024 21:38:11 +0300 Message-ID: <87wmjqndyk.fsf@intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Thu, 05 Sep 2024, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > Jani Nikula 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 >> 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 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. BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel