Re: Proposed change to make -j
- From: Jason Evans <jasone@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 16:30:02 -0800
John Birrell wrote:
Currently 'make -j' reports an error if the number of jobs
isn't specified.
I'd like to change make(1) to treat -j (without a number) as
meaning "set the number of jobs to the number of processors".
On sun4v, each processor isn't too powerful and system performance
is only decent when you use all the processors - 32 in my case.
I've been working on a parallel 'make release' process which
would benefit from having -j set by default. At the moment I
set MAKEFLAGS=j32 in my environment and this achieves the desired
result, but -j would be more general.
For gmake, a bare -j says to not limit the number of simultaneous jobs. I don't think that it's a good idea to use a flag name that already has a different (and potentially useful) meaning for gmake.
I have some concern that no matter what number of jobs you decide to run simultaneously when your proposed flag is specified (N, N+1, 2N, etc., where N is the number of CPUs), that choice will not be universally useful, since the best choice of argument to -j depends on what 'make' is building. Might it be better to use sysctl(8) in your command line?
make -j `sysctl -n hw.ncpu`
Jason
_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Proposed change to make -j
- From: Rink Springer
- Re: Proposed change to make -j
- References:
- Proposed change to make -j
- From: John Birrell
- Proposed change to make -j
- Prev by Date: Re: What is the PREEMPTION option good for?
- Next by Date: Re: Proposed change to make -j
- Previous by thread: Re: Proposed change to make -j
- Next by thread: Re: Proposed change to make -j
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|