Re: Restraining poudriere
- In reply to: Mark Millard via freebsd-arm : "Re: Restraining poudriere"
- Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 10:02:03 UTC
On 2021-Jun-12, at 18:35, Mark Millard <marklmi at yahoo.com> wrote: > On 2021-Jun-12, at 17:53, Mark Millard <marklmi at yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On 2021-Jun-12, at 10:57, bob prohaska <fbsd at www.zefox.net> wrote: >> >>> On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 07:36:48PM +0200, Michael Gmelin wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> On 12. Jun 2021, at 19:31, bob prohaska <fbsd@www.zefox.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> ???In playing with poudriere on raspberry pi 3 and 4 it seems to >>>>> work well on the 8 GB Pi4 but is over-optimistic on the 1 GB Pi3. >>>>> >>>>> Can poudriere be configured to tackle packages one at a time? >>>> >>>> Yes, see poudriere.conf: >>>> >>>> # parallel build support. >>>> # >>>> # By default poudriere uses hw.ncpu to determine the number of builders. >>>> # You can override this default by changing PARALLEL_JOBS here, or >>>> # by specifying the -J flag to bulk/testport. >>>> # >>>> # Example to define PARALLEL_JOBS to one single job >>>> # PARALLEL_JOBS=1 >>>> >>>> -m >>>> >>> >>> I perhaps misunderstood what was meant by "builders", confusing it >>> with threads. Or maybe cores.... >>> >>> Trying it now, hoping to see parallel core use. >> >> You do not seem to have mentioned use of: vm.pageout_oom_seq= >> (just vm.pfault_oom_attempts="-1"). You also mention "[with] >> OOMA turned off" but no combination of settings actually >> completely disables the possibility. >> >> >> Based on notes in my poudriere.conf for a 2 GiByte RAM >> context: >> >> #NOTE: on 2 GiByte RAM contexts I've used: PARALLEL_JOBS=2 but >> # two llvm*'s are likely the biggest combination that >> # could occur in my context. lang/rust or other even >> # larger build contexts need not be appropriate. I >> # normally use ALLOW_MAKE_JOBS=yes . >> PARALLEL_JOBS=2 >> >> So for the smaller RAM context: PARALLEL_JOBS=1 is a possibility. >> >> On a 1 GiByte RPi2B v1.1 (armv7) I've used the combination: >> >> PARALLEL_JOBS=2 >> MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER_LIMIT=2 >> >> so that no more than 4 generally active processes in >> builders/JOBS overall. You have used MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER_LIMIT >> before to build www/chromium (2018-Dec-18 report): >> >> QUOTE >> On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 05:59:21AM +0100, Jan Beich wrote: >>> >>> MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER_LIMIT is a user variable, so you can either set in >>> make.conf or Makefile.local e.g., >>> >>> $ cat <<\. >>${__MAKE_CONF:-/etc/make.conf} >>> .if ${.CURDIR:M*/www/chromium} >>> MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER_LIMIT=2 >>> .endif >> >> Setting MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER_LIMIT=2 allowed www/chromium to compile successfully over >> several days. The -DBATCH option was used, in hopes it'd fetch the right options. >> END QUOTE >> >> As for allowing 4 processes in a build per builder >> (a.k.a. per JOB) generally (for the 4 core context >> without MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER_LIMIT in use) . . . >> >> # By default MAKE_JOBS is disabled to allow only one process per cpu >> # Use the following to allow it anyway >> ALLOW_MAKE_JOBS=yes >> >> So with PARALLEL_JOBS=1 that would have a total of 4 >> processes. >> >> I'll note that threads is yet a separate issue. For example the >> llvm linker might use 1 or 2 more threads than there are cores. >> (These happen in one process.) poudriere does not have a control >> over such tread usage by programs. Threads may or may not use >> up significant RAM in total. >> >> >> I also override a bunch of MAX_EXECUTION_TIME_<?>'s and >> NOHANG_TIME: >> >> # This defines the max time (in seconds) that a command may run for a build >> # before it is killed for taking too long. Default: 86400 >> #MAX_EXECUTION_TIME=86400 >> # Cortex-A53 and such are slow for the purpose, allow 4 times the defaults: >> MAX_EXECUTION_TIME=432000 >> >> # This defines the time (in seconds) before a command is considered to >> # be in a runaway state for having no output on stdout. Default: 7200 >> #NOHANG_TIME=7200 >> # Cortex-A53 and such are slow for the purpose, allow 4 times the defaults: >> # Also: boost-libs seems to have a long time with no output but it making >> # progress in parallel builds. >> NOHANG_TIME=28800 >> >> # Cortex-A53 and such are slow for the purpose, allow 4 times the defaults: >> MAX_EXECUTION_TIME_EXTRACT=14400 >> MAX_EXECUTION_TIME_INSTALL=14400 >> MAX_EXECUTION_TIME_PACKAGE=28800 >> MAX_EXECUTION_TIME_DEINSTALL=14400 >> >> I use: >> >> USE_TMPFS=no >> >> in order to avoid tmpfs competing for RAM in these >> small RAM contexts. >> > > Something else I will note: you reported for the > 1 GiBYte RAM RPi3B use: > > QUOTE > With OOMA turned off and 6 GB of swap > END QUOTE > > Does the system generate a warning about being mistuned > when the swap space is added: > > warning: total configured swap (??? pages) exceeds maximum recommended amount (??? pages). > > Such likely would contribute to "swap blk zone exhausted" > notices. I avoid setting up contexts that generate this > warning about the configured swap by avoiding having too > much swap space for the RAM available to manage it. > > As covered in multiple past exchanges, attempting to adjust > kern.maxswzone to deal with this has other tradeoffs (less > space for other kernel information) if I understand right. > It takes more knowledge than I have to know if such tradeoffs > are appropriate for a particular context. > > My memory is that when I move the Rock64 media to an RPi3B > for an experiment, I use a 3 GiByte swap space to avoid the > warning. (I have a 2nd swap partition that can be also put > to use on the 4 GiByte RAM Rock 64 that goes unused on > the RPi3B. It is rare that I do things sort of experiments. > I took a look via https://pkg-status.freebsd.org and the FreeBSD servers have been building aarch64 llvm10-10.0.1_5 since mid-Feb. without such failures. (Previously llvm10-10.0.1_4 was building.) /wrkdirs/usr/ports/devel/llvm10/work/llvm-10.0.1.src/lib/Target/Hexagon/Disassembler/HexagonDisassembler.cpp is used. It makes me wonder if you have a cached distfile that is corrupted or some such. (The servers use poudriere to do the builds and they do not disable targets.) I do not know if the logfile would give a hint about that or not. I do not remember your indicating what /usr/ports commit poudriere is using --or which way you have poudriere configured to get a ports tree to work with (or related configuration information). === Mark Millard marklmi at yahoo.com ( dsl-only.net went away in early 2018-Mar)