depend + all vs dependall
Bruce Evans
bde at zeta.org.au
Sun Mar 30 23:04:52 PST 2003
On Mon, 31 Mar 2003, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 04:33:43PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> ...
> > @@ -67,7 +67,7 @@
> >
> >
> > .for __target in all all-man checkdpadd clean cleandepend cleandir \
> > - depend distribute lint maninstall \
> > + depend dependall distribute lint maninstall \
> > obj objlink realinstall regress tags
> > ${__target}: _SUBDIR
> > .endfor
>
> If you want to really try dependall, you should implement it
> in bsd.subdir.mk like the distribute target, similar to this:
>
> .if !target(dependall)
> dependall:
> cd ${.CURDIR}; \
> ${MAKE} depend -DNO_SUBDIR; \
> ${MAKE} all -DNO_SUBDIR
> .endif
That won't work, since it gives a double tree traversal for the
subdirs and thus defeats the point of dependall. Any splitting
up of dependall must not be passed down.
> Also, your test is not honest because original Makefile.inc1
> did not parallelize the "all" stage of "buildworld", by not
> implementing par-all. Last time I tried par-all, it saved
> me 16% of time from the -j8 buildworld:
>
> 26m8.74s real 26m13.08s user 11m9.70s sys (old)
> 21m48.52s real 26m20.60s user 11m4.95s sys (new)
>
> Attached is the message with the patch. It has some Russian,
> but also includes a patch. Note that par-all only parallelizes
> top-level bsd.subdir.mk makefiles, as we depend on the ordering
> of traversing SUBDIRs in a few places. The plan is to drop
> this assumption in places that don't need this ordering.
Please benchmark mainly for the usual case of non-SMP :-).
Bruce
More information about the freebsd-arch
mailing list