From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.windriver.com ([147.11.1.11]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QtFDj-0003TK-H3 for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 10:42:00 +0200 Received: from ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hca [147.11.189.40]) by mail.windriver.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p7G8bLhR028644 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 01:37:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [128.224.162.219] (128.224.162.219) by ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (147.11.189.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.255.0; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 01:37:21 -0700 Message-ID: <4E4A2C3F.4040309@windriver.com> Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 16:37:19 +0800 From: Robert Yang User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110617 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: References: <4E450925.7060101@windriver.com> In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [RFC] Performance Issue: Build time increases X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 08:42:00 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 08/12/2011 08:19 PM, Lu, Lianhao wrote: > Robert Yang wrote on 2011-08-12: >> >> Hi folks, >> >> The build time of core-image-sato increases about 5 ~ 10 minutes than >> the following commit: >> >> commit 5af197b55a4b779f1ec93186f0723026949ba2b5 >> Author: Liping Ke >> Date: Fri Jun 3 08:22:40 2011 +0800 >> >> cache: Implement multiple extra cache fields request support > > I think this patch only stores extra information in an extra cache. It only affects the parsing time, and I don't think there will be 5 min difference. How about comparing the "bitbake -e" time with and without the patch(by deleting all the cache files before running bitbake). > I'm sorry that I didn't describe it clearly, what I meant was that: This patch worked correctly, it didn't increase the build time, but other patches after this one made the build time increased, we just use this commit as a reference point. // Robert > Best Regards, > -Lianhao > >> On my host, >> 1) the build time of 5af197b55a4b779f1ec93186f0723026949ba2b5 is: >> >> real 208m26.133s >> user 241m29.280s >> sys 47m0.630s >> >> 2) and: 068839698fe192d8846c0ed4db65861448e8e524 is: >> >> real 217m39.687s >> user 255m34.150s >> sys 48m21.510s >> >> >> I use the bisect build method to find out which patch causes the time >> increases, but the build time is not stable on my host(Ubuntu 11.04 >> 64bit), e.g., the build time of 1) is 208m at the first build, then >> "git co other_commit" and build it, after about 10 builds, then go >> back to build 5af197b55a4b779f1ec, the build time will increases about >> 8 minutes, I have stopped the X and cron, at. This may have relationship with the linux distribution and disk. >> >> So I have to restart the build, reboot the machine by two days, and go >> on the build. It would be better if anyone has other good method. >> >> I think that for the next release(e.g., yocto 1.2), we can find a >> clean and stable machine(for the distribution, maybe RHEL is more >> stable than Ubuntu) to check the build time weekly, so that we can notice the performance issue early. >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-core mailing list > Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core >