Better reviews for the same cost in gcc-linaro
michael.hope at linaro.org
Wed Mar 23 00:20:34 UTC 2011
Hi Robert. The builds end up at:
and include the times for each step such as:
The carina machines are OMAP3s. I'm building C, C++, Fortran, Obj-C,
and Obj-C++ and it takes 12 hours for the build and 16 for the
These are on a NFS root. A ursa machine (PandaBoard) takes 5:14 to
build at -j2 and 9 hours on the testsuite at -j1. 12 divided by 5.25
hours makes the Panda 2.3 x faster than the OMAP3.
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 10:09 AM, Robert Nelson <robertcnelson at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Michael Hope <michael.hope at linaro.org> wrote:
>> We currently use a feature branch / merge request / merge / test /
>> push approach in gcc-linaro. This works fine for a reasonable cost
>> but can mean that patches sit unreviewed and unmerged for up to a
>> month. Ramana, Andrew, and I had a talk about this earlier in the
>> week and I've written up the ideas here:
>> We're a bit unique as gcc-linaro started from a mature base, running
>> the testsuite takes days, and the product is so big that bzr takes a
>> long time to work on it.
> Hey Michael,
> which target's are you actively building/testing fo (c,c++, etc?)
> for reference, i'm just doing "c,c++", here's my average's..
> xM: build: 14 hours, testsuite: 22 hours..
> Panda: build: 9.5 hours, testsuite: 12hours..
> Robert Nelson
More information about the linaro-dev