[lkml]   [2002]   [May]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: kbuild 2.5 is ready for inclusion in the 2.5 kernel
    On Sun, 5 May 2002 19:23:11 +0200 (CEST), 
    Urban Widmark <> wrote:
    >On Thu, 2 May 2002, Keith Owens wrote:
    >> Linus, kbuild 2.5 is ready for inclusion in the main 2.5 kernel tree.
    >> It is faster, better documented, easier to write build rules in, has
    >> better install facilities, allows separate source and object trees, can
    >> do concurrent builds from the same source tree and is significantly
    >> more accurate than the existing kernel build system.
    >Faster ... ?
    >The time I care about is the module rebuild time. From various posts I had
    >the impression that it was significantly improved. I don't find that to be
    >the case unless I'm being "foolhardy" and specify various flags or
    >otherwise bypass the system.
    >[times snipped]
    >Shadow trees sounds interesting. I'm sure others see great benefit from
    >being able to build over NFS or having stricter integrity checks. I just
    >don't get the faster bit, but maybe that's just me.

    You are not comparing like with like. Much of your speed difference
    from kbuild 2.4 to 2.5 is because you have omitted the make dep time.
    kbuild 2.5 does not have a seperate make dep pass. Instead it checks
    the dependencies every time, during phase4.

    Checking the dependencies only once in kbuild 2.4 is a very common
    source of build error. Users change their code, forget to rerun make
    dep then wonder why their kernel and module build is broken. In your
    case, you "know" that your change does not affect the dependencies so
    you omit the make dep run. That is the equivalent of bypassing the
    integrity checks in kbuild 2.5, i.e. it is the equivalent of

    Also you specified make modules. You are bypassing all the checks to
    see if any part of the main kernel needs to be rebuilt because of your
    changes. Whether that bypass is correct or not is unknown, you are
    asserting that it is and bypassing the dependency checks on the rest of
    the kernel. BTW, if you have a lot of modules you will find that your
    make modules time in 2.4 is significantly higher than the times you

    So you found a case that appears to make kbuild 2.4 faster than 2.5.
    You did it by omitting the kbuild 2.4 step that does integrity checking
    and by specifying command line options that bypass most of the build.
    The result is that you are comparing an inaccurate 2.4 build against an
    accurate 2.5 build.

    I have never considered "fast but inaccurate" to be a sensible default
    goal for a kernel build. If you want that, use NO_MAKEFILE_GEN=1.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:25    [W:0.029 / U:63.804 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site