From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F921138A1A for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 03:06:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 57B23E07FC; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 03:06:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C7415E07FA for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 03:06:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.10] (pool-72-95-142-204.pitbpa.fios.verizon.net [72.95.142.204]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: zerochaos) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C1CBB33DA93 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 03:06:10 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <54C9A3A5.9090308@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 22:06:13 -0500 From: "Rick \"Zero_Chaos\" Farina" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v2] Default MAKEOPTS to -j(ncpus+1) when unset References: <54BB3B0B.5020006@gentoo.org> <1421577518-6167-1-git-send-email-mgorny@gentoo.org> <20150118085824.68ae1abc.dolsen@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <20150118085824.68ae1abc.dolsen@gentoo.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="s3JuiSGwJIUUI0lApxSU6wtRtGfpdhjMc" X-Archives-Salt: 203c92a1-5785-48d5-9434-54c9c8e6fc6e X-Archives-Hash: 83fc8a687abe3ed5461d8e52e1883124 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --s3JuiSGwJIUUI0lApxSU6wtRtGfpdhjMc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 01/18/2015 11:58 AM, Brian Dolbec wrote: > On Sun, 18 Jan 2015 11:38:38 +0100 > Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: >=20 >> Default MAKEOPTS job number to (number of CPUs + 1) when it is not >> provided in the ebuild environment. >> >> Suggested-By: Daniel Robbins >> --- >> pym/portage/package/ebuild/doebuild.py | 8 +++++++- >> pym/portage/util/cpuinfo.py | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ >> 2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> create mode 100644 pym/portage/util/cpuinfo.py >> >=20 >=20 > looks good, merge please >=20 I realize I'm a little bit late here, but after extensive testing with multiple different schedulers that NUMCPU provides equivalent performance, or even outperforms NUMCPU+1. I think that changes from 1 cpu to NUMCPU is good enough, and we don't need to test thrashing the scheduler. Thanks, Zero --s3JuiSGwJIUUI0lApxSU6wtRtGfpdhjMc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJUyaOqAAoJEKXdFCfdEflKiw8P/Ra7Gf/GdIsng6Bypkb11vZd yph2O8Y23OOt19AQn+A5q4VUHkQca5fiYzG/E85N4j8f7vHZ6ps6R+oXZxHMkfNS QOnIDKgPacrjckUayrwxP6ArphTEtJ2k/KU/d4YGT0un9wq+7cADEqpQKCS4L+eB s3F298Xx2faV4tRZ45Muw6Y7r13BtpAOLr3VSjGATtA4J9yoEiYhR5Uz2JFZD+dL gWsgXLLFBGwYa9NTi3JRrMAcQVQEqqvREGJGFWzzGR86uhTJ7Takn1edriD/0X0g XYtVVptSOkSPP1TLdUsl9QXjN0UWv2zdhelhf1AK2KeJLbc55zxDv8COorIMbbcm 2zbrq7iW42MeEJrVfSdVOegYiuxXDmIzNiunjnxIGtVA5+vA4apCg43cetQDzEI+ IGS5cu5gYl5FF678QvCoB7ESYAuwObkMLd9EzYuGw8h/Dk8CF7fv3n5rdjy8AixF U2Z0vmqpuSfGkL0oEy1XDFOyJ+MZudyQs95yy/1q01VstWoMaO6S4HnLXV9V4+Pm dc2BtUHMFd/wd+pxjJrhMHLqqFjZK8uzp+F9ItrKZg7EJJWrCObffb7pJ4/Im/eB aS5LGL6ptn67rB7sFPxHAVUe4M0li1wJvHx9adLqtByq20xSRujwW5zzf0Uos8lk u7vxuFtNUxCn5n89juGj =N2kL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --s3JuiSGwJIUUI0lApxSU6wtRtGfpdhjMc--