Openembedded Core Discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield@windriver.com>
To: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: "Hart, Darren" <darren.hart@intel.com>,
	openembedded-core <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: linux-yocto task performance numbers
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 08:14:53 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <54EB27CD.3000800@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1424686123.11836.76.camel@linuxfoundation.org>

On 2015-02-23 5:08 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-02-23 at 00:13 -0500, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
>> Was this the 3.19 kernel you used for these stats ? I just ran a quick
>> test (i.e. not with buildstats) with my latest kernel tree (on my
>> crappy I/O laptop) and get the following:
>>
>> % time bitbake -f -c kernel_configme linux-yocto
>>
>> real    0m7.378s
>> user    0m4.356s
>> sys     0m5.553s
>>
>>
>> So I'm showing 7 seconds, versus 45 in your run .. and I'm showing:
>>
>> real    0m26.371s
>> user    0m12.561s
>> sys     0m19.534s
>>
>> For do_patch (and that is before the already in progress changes that
>> I mentioned earlier).
>>
>> Just with those differences alone, sounds like we should log this in
>> bugzilla and put the details of the configuration and build machines in
>> there .. since I'll need to isolate what is causing those extra long
>> runs, and ensure that everything is pushed to the various trees.
>
> I think I messed up and ran against a slightly different version. The
> numbers confirmed with 3.19 are:
>
> do_bundle_initramfs: Elapsed time: 0.03 seconds
> do_compile: Elapsed time: 78.07 seconds
> do_compile_kernelmodules: Elapsed time: 35.23 seconds
> do_configure: Elapsed time: 0.60 seconds
> do_deploy: Elapsed time: 14.39 seconds
> do_fetch: Elapsed time: 0.04 seconds
> do_install: Elapsed time: 2.02 seconds
> do_kernel_checkout: Elapsed time: 10.67 seconds
> do_kernel_configcheck: Elapsed time: 8.03 seconds
> do_kernel_configme: Elapsed time: 70.41 seconds
> do_kernel_link_vmlinux: Elapsed time: 0.03 seconds
> do_package: Elapsed time: 33.48 seconds
> do_packagedata: Elapsed time: 2.30 seconds
> do_package_qa: Elapsed time: 4.94 seconds
> do_package_write_ipk: Elapsed time: 68.72 seconds
> do_package_write_rpm: Elapsed time: 44.33 seconds
> do_patch: Elapsed time: 56.43 seconds
> do_populate_lic: Elapsed time: 0.14 seconds
> do_populate_sysroot: Elapsed time: 0.16 seconds
> do_shared_workdir: Elapsed time: 0.04 seconds
> do_sizecheck: Elapsed time: 0.03 seconds
> do_strip: Elapsed time: 0.03 seconds
> do_uboot_mkimage: Elapsed time: 0.02 seconds
> do_unpack: Elapsed time: 5.06 seconds
> do_validate_branches: Elapsed time: 0.69 seconds
>
> To get the numbers:
>
> bitbake linux-yocto -c cleansstate
> bitbake linux-yocto
> $ (cd tmp/buildstats/linux-yocto-qemux86-64/201502230954/linux-yocto-3.19+gitAUTOINC+8897ef68b3_43b9eced9b-r0/; grep El * | sed s/linux-yocto-3.19+gitAUTOINC+8897ef68b3_43b9eced9b-r0// | sed s/^.*:://)
>
> So configcheck is better but the other times still seem high.

Yep. configme should never take that long, so something different
is happening in your qemu build than mine. I'll dig up my other
speedup changes and run them against the same machine build and
see what I get.

I just did a run for qemumips, and patching took 9 seconds :)

Bruce

>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard
>



  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-02-23 13:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-02-22 13:04 linux-yocto task performance numbers Richard Purdie
2015-02-22 14:05 ` Bruce Ashfield
2015-02-23  5:13 ` Bruce Ashfield
2015-02-23 10:08   ` Richard Purdie
2015-02-23 10:22     ` Richard Purdie
2015-02-23 13:14     ` Bruce Ashfield [this message]
2015-02-23 16:25 ` Hart, Darren

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=54EB27CD.3000800@windriver.com \
    --to=bruce.ashfield@windriver.com \
    --cc=darren.hart@intel.com \
    --cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
    --cc=richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.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