linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] kbuild: Cache exploratory calls to the compiler

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sun, 15 Oct 2017 16:48:40 +0900
From:   Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
To:     Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc:     Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>,
        Simon Glass <sjg@...omium.org>,
        Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>,
        Cao jin <caoj.fnst@...fujitsu.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, James Hogan <jhogan@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
        Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mark Charlebois <charlebm@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] kbuild: Cache exploratory calls to the compiler

2017-10-12 1:19 GMT+09:00 Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>:
> 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.
>
> Ingo Molnar also did some testing of this in his environment and found
> that an incremental build of his subsystem sped up from ~.44 seconds
> before to ~.15 seconds after.  Clean builds also sped up by a marginal
> amount.  :)
>
> Changes in v3:
> - Rule to prevent make from trying to generate the cache
> - Rule to clean .cache.mk
> - No more doc changes
> - Moved cache stuff below cc-cross-prefix
> - Removed duplicate documentation of try-run (oops)
> - Add Tested-by for Ingo and Guenter since v2 and v3 are very similar
>
> 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
>
>  Makefile               |  5 +--
>  scripts/Kbuild.include | 87 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>  2 files changed, 76 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)


Series, applied to linux-kbuild/kbuild.


-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada