From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 457111F66F for ; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 16:23:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726576AbgHLQXI (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Aug 2020 12:23:08 -0400 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.17.12]:60767 "EHLO mout.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725872AbgHLQXH (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Aug 2020 12:23:07 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=web.de; s=dbaedf251592; t=1597249382; bh=hUQHNrzXSKstXAO92bv6Hm6kOcQBx7t1PCqBz9C7cqE=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=rRQfabWgTlkl7c2sj/xHP1fhGuaoS8vpIVJ7aY0kK19Q3Zg2yv6Tqws3gtYQaMjgT j57aaCUCTUWmLVBpG1brLM84L5cU+kd3eW53c/yKCDHrrtfqS2O+UuwHjQvQvPcPRP 6Qs5F3SlGvrjDRnorZh+26tywb2jvU+6pQVacH38= X-UI-Sender-Class: c548c8c5-30a9-4db5-a2e7-cb6cb037b8f9 Received: from [192.168.178.26] ([79.203.26.151]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb102 [213.165.67.124]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M2uWg-1kwLDs0jTC-00shaC; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 18:23:02 +0200 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/11] renaming argv_array To: Jeff King Cc: git@vger.kernel.org References: <20200728202124.GA1021264@coredump.intra.peff.net> <82991f30-fe37-d6d2-ffd5-8b0878f46c83@web.de> <20200812150611.GA33189@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20200812151038.GB33189@coredump.intra.peff.net> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Ren=c3=a9_Scharfe?= Message-ID: <045ea49b-7165-0f45-e670-a24bf648f880@web.de> Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 18:23:01 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200812151038.GB33189@coredump.intra.peff.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:GphvW58+S+VCLAWfHmkNwWy2FutM1ppIc6nT0wR8z3qem/kexNC zoi4zlXmBUDq2itA0E5jwAoz7USsLtJC2pBKZFCToZp03LI+m596LQchHlB1iztdGgHcB/g 52fEArNPdrC2X0q1q8a81vAe/I7UL/T+HSt8VZHLaWXgVn6MMLBh726DXw/YlMlh8RkPlQ4 dVZegFUuxBbNiEPjfOl9Q== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:tjmOrK3MYp0=:sndws8zE4BWQ1x0nAGTdAw TLrlUV0BIR5GEoVlyrsmUxF5CNnvv/y+vp95y4uOnP7F4beAP/mfFSi+3JN85e3LN4uwbxKc4 ClUPtHAbhXxo4FKgwoPpZ49/bKipiMwHZqiLzqtYFffJe4t0rf/DlVVXnH1d1gpE2P3uHurbA b8V7caoWJaopiY3HY64mrZTUN61wM9kyrPDoUuUMfGg43QQabF20TamlL/dXGTwGIROerTKhw EV1pPBeSBkSE6j+EeIkkJTIJ4EUQoR6U+2SEwgoFRIcsXtye6wcrszn2D5nJwtxxTo748PBdc PCecRSIjFwajufzM1smMztPNNdsVAa7CpY2/4dvEFZy2qj0uSqbmk1tFPlKgYPoPT0K8tMLa4 g/mWBsklzywABbGNckiXcyA4XsTolIGhoqEPKjTNOQAl+CS9A0TGjtJe0OlypKcD1GzQWejQ2 JMHCnwCNo1/THiREzVH74W269iMCZBY24TfKKQFnm54EFOzXKzbxOhghAE5u7vlaNV/Geb/CC /79pOOCaS526E+ucdGrdt9XlW6mrqkMlLKu7wxDVmNeX9QEy4p5/FRmAZ5rRW1DqHLt16q3+P 3no0RqpRjIl4dEeV8CbQktNkuDZf1bpzIulvDk6aLVk5oHUidagNwkz8PT4z0tSIYng8RDztL RoqYHL6rTQSh1HHFTXLfbP+9E/QOofezB+R2P15MMKYrx1XJwMFoJWgrfW2fRJxIyoCTfvsnf WazIXqRsIHNnyZv0cP38PTIZ5wUoiyz+QKjsfFRmQx8Bt93S/BLS2Zau+/qqAAXnYrisCdch6 znrlGnuAtwy7o3MOont0FiKSdicspWtEmI4ZwAlxuEWIfY+thQnrPr26IDvEPGhLi2aRTGHhJ 3KovtgrTO72KVoT7qLZw8KjpY3cNf+Ll1euYXpMuuPP5PbUe601s5rl86Nx3lRa2gRdyxSKaO NVq4G34v9QkJ8ul2jlRM1KuZyU7qRcjwARNWA+7bVsuyxJZWA7BgBeTq3gyfcKaLB5jnsAM83 GqZTXN0gze0a3zYN5WbgqX4G3JOC1j5xYys5fEIVmXbwG5SZA0tALvIo2gISJmeFpyDAA9s8J L56B5APx3+YITlF+tqn2QhivBxmRoetCjuwi+xyBWZZhUviJDXKye60xmh61yXayZYkzvDi7X miIr5ju2lGZ4qInOOYAnohxekwD88Zgp5QekESu/HKs75yCPgnevS37P0LuccXGS1gmViyteF RLVcA8oLH9IAHlRRn Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Am 12.08.20 um 17:10 schrieb Jeff King: > On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 11:06:11AM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > >> Debian unstable now ships coccinelle 1.0.8, and it's unbelievably slow >> compared to 1.0.4. Running "make coccicheck" is currently at 80 minutes >> of CPU time running each script in parallel, with none of them down. >> They're also all consuming 6GB of RAM each, so I'm killing them all. > > This seems to be related to setting SPATCH_BATCH_SIZE to "0". It used to= make > things go much faster (if you had enough memory), but now seems to just > consume tons of CPU. Setting it to "1" finishes the whole thing in ~13 > minutes of CPU (~2m wall-clock). This bit me as well, and I settled with SPATCH_BATCH_SIZE =3D 10. With MAKEFLAGS +=3D -j3 I get these number, which are quite similar to yours (except I don't dare use more cores due to cooling issues..): real 4m12,393s user 12m15,447s sys 0m10,418s > So that's at least a path forward, but in general I have been frustrated > with operational aspects of coccinelle like this. And I was a bit shocked when Coccinelle's testing package became unmaintained for a while and I had to compile it from source. And yes, coccicheck is quite heavy. When I merge all .cocci files into one I get: real 2m7,164s user 2m5,389s sys 0m1,572s Nice. With spatch -j3 I get basically the same numbers, though. Hmm. Ren=C3=A9