[PATCH] torture: Fix the O3 developer build

Michael Adam obnox at samba.org
Thu Mar 24 14:37:09 UTC 2016

On 2016-03-23 at 16:52 +1300, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-03-22 at 22:32 +0100, Michael Adam wrote:
> > On 2016-03-22 at 22:28 +0100, Michael Adam wrote:
> > > On 2016-03-22 at 13:38 -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 06:41:42PM +0100, Michael Adam wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > I propose that we add a -O3 build target
> > > > > to our autobuild, so that there are no excuses.
> > > > > 
> > > > > See the attached patch.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Note that this fails on my f23 box... need to fix a few
> > > > > O3 bugs as it seems ... :-)
> > > > Let's fix those as well, then push the whole thing :-).
> > > Ok ... Now this updated patch survices autobuild on my box.
> > > 
> Can't we do this in the samba-static target?  

I will consider this.

> Each build requires a lot of resources, and while CPU is cheap, it
> isn't free.

Right. While looking at this, there was one thing that
really puzzled me:

I noticed that the samba-libs and samba-static targets have
been re-converted to use "make -j" instead of plain "make":

commit 05c34810a8184a67d2836fcae51ec8de8c4a46fc
Author:     Andrew Bartlett <abartlet at samba.org>
AuthorDate: Thu Oct 22 14:57:10 2015 +1300
Commit:     Stefan Metzmacher <metze at samba.org>
CommitDate: Tue Jan 5 09:10:24 2016 +0100

    autobuild: Use make -j on samba-libs/samba-static build as well
    We need this build to be fast when split out as a seperate VM
    Signed-off-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet at samba.org>
    Reviewed-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze at samba.org>

I had not noticed this earlier, but I think this is bad for our
autobuild runs on sn-devel: Previously we explicitly only allowed
make -j in the main 'samba' target, but not in the other samba
targets for good reasons. With the above applied we risk running
multiple make -j simultaneously on sn-devel from a single
autobuild run. When running autobuild.py without selecting one
target, this will happen.  And sn-devel is overloaded already at
times, which was why we started to serialize the builds. (When we
recently opened it up to 2 parallel builds again, there were
issues, so we rolled back to fully serial).

I also don't understand the 'when split ous as a separate VM' at
all. What does that allude to? We are on sn-devel currently
running the full autobuild with all targets. If we need those
targets to build fast when selected explicitly, we should
integrate some magic (similar to the one we're doing to disable
the random-sleep when explicitly selecting a target).

> On the plus side, if you push via github, then it will do
> these builds for you on each pull request via travis-ci.org

How does this (building via travis) relate as the plus side
to the minus side (which is, I assume, that CPU is not cheap,
especially on our autobuild-push-gate)?

Sorry, but I am confused... :-)

Furthermore: About the travis thing: this is something that
completely went below my radar up to now. Is this documented
somewhere? At least for the team?

Thanks - Michael
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba-technical/attachments/20160324/30ef6567/signature.sig>

More information about the samba-technical mailing list