On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 12:48:21PM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 20/05/2021 13.27, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > > +Stefan/Daniel > > > > On 5/20/21 10:02 AM, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > On 19/05/2021 20.45, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > > > > If a runner has ccache installed, use it and display statistics > > > > at the end of the build. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4...@amsat.org> > > > > --- > > > > .gitlab-ci.d/buildtest-template.yml | 5 +++++ > > > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/.gitlab-ci.d/buildtest-template.yml > > > > b/.gitlab-ci.d/buildtest-template.yml > > > > index f284d7a0eec..a625c697d3b 100644 > > > > --- a/.gitlab-ci.d/buildtest-template.yml > > > > +++ b/.gitlab-ci.d/buildtest-template.yml > > > > @@ -6,13 +6,18 @@ > > > > then > > > > JOBS=$(sysctl -n hw.ncpu) > > > > MAKE=gmake > > > > + PATH=/usr/local/libexec/ccache:$PATH > > > > ; > > > > else > > > > JOBS=$(expr $(nproc) + 1) > > > > MAKE=make > > > > + PATH=/usr/lib/ccache:/usr/lib64/ccache:$PATH > > > > > > That does not make sense for the shared runners yet. We first need > > > something to enable the caching there - see my series "Use ccache in the > > > gitlab-CI" from April (which is currently stalled unfortunately). > > > > TL;DR: I don't think we should restrict our templates to shared runners. > > I'm certainly not voting for restricting ourselves to only use shared > runners here - but my concern is that this actually *slows* down the shared > runners even more! (sorry, I should have elaborated on that in my previous > mail already) > > When I was experimenting with ccache in the shared runners, I saw that the > jobs are running even slower with ccache enabled as long as the cache is not > populated yet. You only get a speedup afterwards. So if you add this now > without also adding the possibility to store the cache persistently, the > shared runners will try to populate the cache each time just to throw away > the results afterwards again. Thus all the shared runners only get slower > without any real benefit here. > > Thus we either need to get ccache working properly for the shared runners > first, or you have to think of a different way of enabling ccache for the > non-shared runners, so that it does not affect the shared runners > negatively.
Is there anything functional holding up your previous full cccache support series from last month ? Or is it just lack of reviews ? Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
