Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 11 Sep 1998 00:33:36 -0700 (PDT) | From | Sang Kang <> | Subject | Re: make -j |
| |
On Thu, 10 Sep 1998, David Schleef wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 10, 1998 at 10:02:58PM -0700, Sang Kang wrote: > > Hello kernel hackers, > > > > I've been trying to compile the kernel with 'make -j' option for > > some more cpu utilization. After a short while, the linux box > > rebooted itself. But some people were successful with this > > experiment (it happened on both 2.0.36(latest beta) and 2.1.120) > > Can someone shed me a light ? > > Read the make man page.
anyone doesn't?
> > Try a 'make -j 10'. It will limit the number of processes started > to 10; this seems to be adequate to keep my PPro200 busy. Specifying > no number is almost equivalent to a fork bomb on some of the linux > source directories. People with lots of RAM can get away with it.
I got that far before reading this mail by issuing "make -j 4 zImage". thrashing? yeah....
> This cures the symptom, but it leaves the question: why does linux > behave poorly in this situation?
I don't quite follow what you mean by "poor behavior", but linux definitely have a problem handling workload such as this - it can be as simple as the process table was filled since during the compilation I saw about 2000 processes were forked/exited before the reboot.
Sang
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/faq.html
| |