From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 5 May 2002 20:42:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 5 May 2002 20:42:08 -0400 Received: from zok.SGI.COM ([204.94.215.101]:32462 "EHLO zok.sgi.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 5 May 2002 20:42:06 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.2 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 From: Keith Owens To: dank@kegel.com Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: kbuild 2.5 is ready for inclusion in the 2.5 kernel In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 05 May 2002 17:02:30 MST." <3CD5C816.D73F0532@kegel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 10:40:22 +1000 Message-ID: <9358.1020645622@kao2.melbourne.sgi.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 05 May 2002 17:02:30 -0700, Dan Kegel wrote: >BTW I'm looking at your kbuild 2.5 performance measurements at >http://www.mail-archive.com/kbuild-devel%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg01434.html >Looks like 9 seconds to rebuild the kernel after a small change >on a quad 700MHz pentium, right? (Or does 'make phase4' not actually build?) Those times are for the full timestamp, dependency and integrity checking. phase4 does not build. Actual kernel build time depends on what has changed, what needs to be rebuilt and whether you are compressing the kernel. >What would the time be on a dual pentium? For phase1 through phase4, no difference, the startup code is almost entirely sequential and uses one cpu. After phase4 and into the compile steps, more processors are better.