public inbox for linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
To: yamada.masahiro@socionext.com, mmarek@suse.com
Cc: groeck@chromium.org, sjg@chromium.org, briannorris@chromium.org,
	Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>,
	Marcin Nowakowski <marcin.nowakowski@imgtec.com>,
	Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org>,
	Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Mark Charlebois <charlebm@gmail.com>,
	linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	James Hogan <james.hogan@imgtec.com>,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH v2 0/2] kbuild: Cache exploratory calls to the compiler
Date: Wed,  4 Oct 2017 15:37:15 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171004223717.3010-1-dianders@chromium.org> (raw)

This two-patch series attempts to speed incremental builds of the
kernel up by a bit.  How much of a speedup you get depends a lot on
your environment, specifically the speed of your workstation and how
fast it takes to invoke the compiler.

In the Chrome OS build environment you get a really big win.  For an
incremental build (via emerge) I measured a speedup from ~1 minute to
~35 seconds.  ...but Chrome OS calls the compiler through a number of
wrapper scripts and also calls the kernel make at least twice for an
emerge (during compile stage and install stage), so it's a bit of a
worst case.

Perhaps a more realistic measure of the speedup others might see is
running "time make help > /dev/null" outside of the Chrome OS build
environment on my system.  When I do this I see that it took more than
1.0 seconds before and less than 0.2 seconds after.  So presumably
this has the ability to shave ~0.8 seconds off an incremental build
for most folks out there.  While 0.8 seconds savings isn't huge, it
does make incremental builds feel a lot snappier.

Caveats from v1 still copied here, though with Masahiro Yamada's
suggestions from v1 this is starting to feel a little more baked and
I've even dropped the RFC from it (though extra testing still
appreciated):

Please note that I make no illusions of being a Makefile expert nor do
I have any belief that I fully understand the Linux kernel build
system.  Please take this patch series as the start of a discussion
about whether others feel like this type of speedup is worthwhile and
how to best accomplish it.  Specific things to note:

- I'm happy to paint the bikeshed any color that maintainers want.  If
  you'd like the cache named differently, in a slightly different
  format, or you want me to adjust the spacing / names of Makefile
  stuff then please just let me know.

- If this is totally the wrong approach and you have a better idea
  then let me know.  If you want something that's super complicated to
  explain then feel free to post a replacement patch and I'm happy to
  test.

- This patch definitely needs extra testing.  I've tested it on a very
  limited build environment and it seems to be working fine, but I
  could believe that with some weird compiler options or on certain
  architectures you might need some extra escaping here and there.

Changes in v2:
- Abstract at a different level (like shell-cached) per Masahiro Yamada
- Include ld-version, which I missed the first time

Douglas Anderson (2):
  kbuild: Add a cache for generated variables
  kbuild: Cache a few more calls to the compiler

 Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.txt | 21 +++++++++
 Makefile                           |  4 +-
 scripts/Kbuild.include             | 90 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
 3 files changed, 99 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

-- 
2.14.2.920.gcf0c67979c-goog


             reply	other threads:[~2017-10-04 22:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-10-04 22:37 Douglas Anderson [this message]
2017-10-04 22:37 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] kbuild: Add a cache for generated variables Douglas Anderson
2017-10-11  3:59   ` Masahiro Yamada
2017-10-11 16:20     ` Doug Anderson
2017-10-04 22:37 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] kbuild: Cache a few more calls to the compiler Douglas Anderson
2017-10-05  1:46 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] kbuild: Cache exploratory " Guenter Roeck
2017-10-05  7:52 ` Ingo Molnar

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=20171004223717.3010-1-dianders@chromium.org \
    --to=dianders@chromium.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=briannorris@chromium.org \
    --cc=caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=charlebm@gmail.com \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=groeck@chromium.org \
    --cc=james.hogan@imgtec.com \
    --cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=marcin.nowakowski@imgtec.com \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=mka@chromium.org \
    --cc=mmarek@suse.com \
    --cc=sjg@chromium.org \
    --cc=yamada.masahiro@socionext.com \
    /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