This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Large parallel glibc builds.
- From: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at redhat dot com>
- To: sellcey at imgtec dot com
- Cc: GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, Konstantin Serebryany <kcc at google dot com>, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:08:39 -0500
- Subject: Re: Large parallel glibc builds.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <5679A3BE dot 2060303 at redhat dot com> <1450813206 dot 4194 dot 48 dot camel at ubuntu-sellcey>
On 12/22/2015 02:40 PM, Steve Ellcey wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-12-22 at 14:25 -0500, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>> I am consistently doing parallel (-j56) builds for glibc
>> on Intel Xeon CPU E5-2697 v3 @ 2.60GHz (2 socket x 14 cores x 2HT).
>> I have not seen any failures or artifacts that look like hazards
>> or races in our makefiles.
>> Is anyone else using larger boxes for builds and still seeing
> I haven't had any problems with parallel builds on my smaller boxes but
> I am still defining PARALLELMFLAGS in order to get parallel builds of
> glibc. Is PARALLELMFLAGS still necessary?
Thanks for the data point.
I believe PARALLELMFLAGS is still required, I use it in my scripts.
I haven't seen anyone fix this or make it more "just works."