Alexander Kanavin <alex.kana...@gmail.com> escreveu no dia quinta, 3/12/2020 à(s) 18:20:
> I'd rather teach bitbake to abstain from starting new tasks when I/O or > CPU gets tight. > This is definitely the best approach in my view. however more complex to implement. Quaresma > Alex > > On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 at 18:48, Ross Burton <r...@burtonini.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Currently, BB_NUMBER_THREADS and PARALLEL_MAKE use the number of cores >> available unless told otherwise. This was a good idea six years >> ago[1] but some modern machines are moving to very large core counts. >> >> For example, 88 core dual Xeons are fairly common. A ThunderX2 has 256 >> cores (2 sockets, 4 hyperthreads per physical core). The Ampere Altra >> is dual socket 2*80=160 cores. >> >> At this level of parallelisation the sheer amount of I/O from the >> unpack storm is quite excessive. As a strawman argument, I propose a >> hard cap to the default BB_NUMBER_THREADS of -- and I'm literally >> making up numbers here -- 32. Maybe 64. Comments? >> >> Cheers, >> Ross >> >> [1] >> http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/poky/commit/?id=1529ef0504542145f2b81b2dba4bcc81d5dac96e >> >> >> >> > > > -- best regards, José Quaresma
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#145288): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/145288 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/78690216/21656 Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
