Wouldn't "0" be a better default? Setting threads to "0" will make xz use the
CPU count anyway, so it'd be honest too.
Met vriendelijke groet / kind regards,
Mike Looijmans
System Expert
TOPIC Embedded Products B.V.
Materiaalweg 4, 5681 RJ Best
The Netherlands
T: +31 (0) 499 33 69 69
E: mike.looijm...@topicproducts.com
W: www.topic.nl
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
On 11-09-2021 12:04, Richard Purdie via lists.openembedded.org wrote:
rpm output packages currently depend on the value of XZ_THREADS which
is ok if left to the default value but problematic if system limits
are set such as on the autobuilder.
Force the value to a specific one in the hashes for better sstate reuse
and consistent rpm task checksums.
Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org>
---
meta/conf/bitbake.conf | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/meta/conf/bitbake.conf b/meta/conf/bitbake.conf
index 2140d498f7c..e25d632dc1c 100644
--- a/meta/conf/bitbake.conf
+++ b/meta/conf/bitbake.conf
@@ -811,6 +811,7 @@ PARALLEL_MAKE ?= "-j ${@oe.utils.cpu_count()}"
# Default parallelism and resource usage for xz
XZ_MEMLIMIT ?= "50%"
XZ_THREADS ?= "${@oe.utils.cpu_count(at_least=2)}"
+XZ_THREADS[vardepvalue] = "1"
XZ_DEFAULTS ?= "--memlimit=${XZ_MEMLIMIT} --threads=${XZ_THREADS}"
XZ_DEFAULTS[vardepsexclude] += "XZ_MEMLIMIT XZ_THREADS"
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#156483):
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/156483
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/85529700/21656
Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
