Re: How to investigate an unexpected port build time-taken relationship in an aarch64 context?
- Reply: Mark Millard : "Re: How to investigate an unexpected port build time-taken relationship in an aarch64 context?"
- In reply to: Mark Millard : "How to investigate an unexpected port build time-taken relationship in an aarch64 context?"
- Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 2024 06:59:14 UTC
On Feb 28, 2024, at 18:46, Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com> wrote: > Example HW Context: Windows Development Kit 2023 > 8 cores: 4 cortex-A78C's and 4 cortex-X1C's > Headless: serial console and ssh access, no x11 or the like installed. > UFS use. > > Note: cortex-A76's are missing 3 or so instruction set > features compared to A78C/X1C parts. Use of > -mcpu=cortex-a76 generated code is compatibile (and would allow > the code to run on a cortex-a76 system, such as an RPi5 once > supported). > > I've been doing poudriere-devel bulk timing experiments based on: > > A) PkgBase based system software (kernel and world) and > general use of default code generation for ports and > such. > > B) A personal -mcpu=cortex-a76 based kernel, world, port builds > (into packages via poudriere-devel). > > C) Also use of an armv7 poudriere jail based on armv7 PkgBase > and default armv7 code generation. This was used in both the > (A) and (B) contexts. These also show what I'm curious about. > > Using the armv7 poudriere jail context for illustration: > > For (B) used via the armv7 context: > > [05:40:24] [03] [04:55:38] Finished lang/rust | rust-1.76.0: Success > . . . > [05:45:58] [01] [05:01:12] Finished devel/llvm18@default | llvm18-18.1.0.r3: Success > [05:46:00] [01] [00:00:00] Building devel/boost-libs | boost-libs-1.84.0 > [06:59:23] [01] [01:13:23] Finished devel/boost-libs | boost-libs-1.84.0: Success > > For (A) used via the armv7 poudriere jail context: > > [06:33:21] [01] [05:40:48] Finished lang/rust | rust-1.76.0: Success > . . . > [06:40:05] [05] [05:48:09] Finished devel/llvm18@default | llvm18-18.1.0.r3: Success > [06:40:07] [01] [00:00:00] Building devel/boost-libs | boost-libs-1.84.0 > [06:57:48] [01] [00:17:41] Finished devel/boost-libs | boost-libs-1.84.0: Success > > The curiosity is about the 01:13:23 vs. 00:17:41 boost-libs: The > ratio is large and in the opposite direction to most time trends. > > Notes: Almost all the time llvm18 and rust were building, both were > building but little else did and the load average was 16+ from the > llvm18/rust build activity. When boost-libs was building it was the > only thing building and it looked to be single threaded when I > was watching. I should have been explicit that the 01:13:23 was mostly "stage" phase (not "build" phase) and I was referring to the "stage" phase as far as single threaded is concerned. > (A) and (B) without use of the armv7 context got similar results > when I first noticed this but I'm going back and recording times > for some variations. I do not have those to report other > pairs of results yet. > > (In the armv7 poudriere jail context reported:) > (B) takes less time for llvm18 and rust than (A) does. > (A) takes vastly less time for boost-libs than (B) does, > approximately a factor of 4 for the time-ratio. > > I'd be curious to get a clue what contributes to the boost-libs > time ratio being so extreme once I have figures for other > combinations of poudriere jail content vs. the system's content. Turns out that for the aarch64 jail (PkgBase system and default code generation), stage started about 10 min into the boost-libs activity. Package started somewhat under 5 minutes later. End result: [05:55:56] [03] [05:33:12] Finished lang/rust | rust-1.76.0: Success . . . [06:04:37] [01] [05:41:53] Finished devel/llvm18@default | llvm18-18.1.0.r3: Success [06:04:39] [01] [00:00:00] Building devel/boost-libs | boost-libs-1.84.0 [06:20:50] [01] [00:16:11] Finished devel/boost-libs | boost-libs-1.84.0: Success So, very similar to the armv7 jail result for a PkgBase system context (aarch64 boot and aarch64/armv7 PkgBase jail, default code generation). It appears that the boost-libs "stage" phase is the context for my question. For the jail code generation being based on -mcpu=cortex-a76 code generation but the boot having been PkgBase based: Stage started about 11.5 min into the boost-libs activity. Package started around 48 minutes later. End result (showing only boost-libs): [01:07:01] [01] [01:06:31] Finished devel/boost-libs | boost-libs-1.84.0: Success I'll note that bjam stays around 100% CPU in top during this much longer "stage" phase. Definitely less than the 01:13:23 time. MWCHAN "-", STAT RJ, PRI 135 when I looked. For the jail code generation and boot context both being based on -mcpu=cortex-a76 code generation: [05:16:38] [01] [00:49:22] Finished devel/boost-libs | boost-libs-1.83.0_1: Success Also definitely less than the 01:13:23 time. (I'm showing here an earlier test when it was boost-libs v1.83.) A ZFS context (instead of UFS context) showed: [04:37:47] [03] [04:03:16] Finished lang/rust | rust-1.76.0: Success . . . [04:43:47] [01] [04:09:16] Finished devel/llvm18@default | llvm18-18.1.0.r3: Success [04:43:48] [01] [00:00:00] Building devel/boost-libs | boost-libs-1.84.0 [05:41:46] [01] [00:57:58] Finished devel/boost-libs | boost-libs-1.84.0: Success === Mark Millard marklmi at yahoo.com