From: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Enrico Scholz <enrico.scholz@sigma-chemnitz.de>
Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] kernel: fix out of tree module builds
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 12:24:52 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1418991892.13316.12.camel@linuxfoundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ly7fxnon55.fsf@ensc-virt.intern.sigma-chemnitz.de>
On Fri, 2014-12-19 at 13:11 +0100, Enrico Scholz wrote:
> Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> writes:
> > to the point of not being a currently well supported use case and the
> > classes would probably need to be refactored to allow such things to
> > be well supported. These changes do bring significant benefit
>
> Does some lowered i/o really provide such a benefit? With the new
> system you are bypassing the excellent staging system (which would
> detect e g ".config" or "System.map" file conflicts). Afais, it breaks
> with "rm_work" too (I guess, kernel:fetch stamp is removed when kernel
> build finishes and packages which inherit "kernelsrc" fetch the kernel
> sources (without .config and System.map) again).
In summary, basically, yes. The kernel source is huge and we were
compressing/decompressing it in several places on the critical path.
People were struggling to develop kernels using the system due to the
overhead.
Whilst this approach does bypass some parts of the system, I do believe
the benefits are worth it. We're talking about making the kernel build
time about three times faster iirc, and reducing its sstate footprint
significantly.
Cheers,
Richard
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-12-19 12:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-12-10 10:34 [PATCH 0/7] kernel: consolidated pull for developer experience Bruce Ashfield
2014-12-10 10:34 ` [PATCH 1/7] kernel: Rearrange for 1.8 Bruce Ashfield
2014-12-10 12:45 ` Bruce Ashfield
2014-12-10 10:34 ` [PATCH 2/7] kernel: fix out of tree module builds Bruce Ashfield
2014-12-19 11:05 ` Enrico Scholz
2014-12-19 11:51 ` Richard Purdie
2014-12-19 12:11 ` Enrico Scholz
2014-12-19 12:24 ` Richard Purdie [this message]
2014-12-23 2:07 ` Enrico Scholz
2014-12-23 8:54 ` Richard Purdie
2014-12-23 10:51 ` Enrico Scholz
2014-12-23 15:36 ` Bruce Ashfield
2014-12-23 15:28 ` Bruce Ashfield
2014-12-10 10:34 ` [PATCH 3/7] kerneldev: create kernel-devsrc packaging Bruce Ashfield
2014-12-10 10:34 ` [PATCH 4/7] images: introduce core-image-kernel-dev Bruce Ashfield
2014-12-10 10:34 ` [PATCH 5/7] lttng/perf: depend on virtual/kernel:do_install Bruce Ashfield
2014-12-10 10:34 ` [PATCH 6/7] kernel-yocto: fix non-git builds Bruce Ashfield
2014-12-10 10:34 ` [PATCH 7/7] kernel-yocto: make sure git tags get dereferenced properly in do_patch() Bruce Ashfield
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=1418991892.13316.12.camel@linuxfoundation.org \
--to=richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=enrico.scholz@sigma-chemnitz.de \
--cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.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