| Message ID | 20181105202344.0cab8e1e@centurylink.net |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [bug#33284] python: Honor '--cores=...' in tests. | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| cbaines/applying patch | success | Successfully applied |
| cbaines/applying patch | success | Successfully applied |
Hi Eric, Your patch seems go to me, even if I think the root cause of your problem is fixed by: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=33186#26 I think that both could be applied to core-updates. Thanks, Mathieu Le mar. 6 nov. 2018 11:27, Eric Bavier <ericbavier@centurylink.net> a écrit : > Hello Guix, > > I noticed building 'python-minimal' that its tests seemed to have poor > memory performance, i.e. using *a lot* of RAM. I thought maybe > dropping --cores=... would help, but it did not; the tests use all > available cores by default. The attached patch fixes this issue, > though, the package still uses all cores while building some extension > libraries. > > I suppose this patch would go to core-updates? > > Cheers, > `~Eric >
Hello Mathieu, On Tue, 6 Nov 2018 14:07:47 +0900 Mathieu Othacehe <m.othacehe@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Eric, > > Your patch seems go to me, even if I think the root cause of your problem > is fixed by: > > https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=33186#26 > > I think that both could be applied to core-updates. Thanks for the link; it looks like it should help. But, yes, I think both can be applied. > > Le mar. 6 nov. 2018 11:27, Eric Bavier <ericbavier@centurylink.net> a > écrit : > > > Hello Guix, > > > > I noticed building 'python-minimal' that its tests seemed to have poor > > memory performance, i.e. using *a lot* of RAM. I thought maybe > > dropping --cores=... would help, but it did not; the tests use all > > available cores by default. The attached patch fixes this issue, > > though, the package still uses all cores while building some extension > > libraries. > > > > I suppose this patch would go to core-updates? > > > > Cheers, > > `~Eric > >
Eric Bavier <ericbavier@centurylink.net> writes: > Hello Mathieu, > > On Tue, 6 Nov 2018 14:07:47 +0900 > Mathieu Othacehe <m.othacehe@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Eric, >> >> Your patch seems go to me, even if I think the root cause of your problem >> is fixed by: >> >> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=33186#26 >> >> I think that both could be applied to core-updates. > > Thanks for the link; it looks like it should help. But, yes, I think > both can be applied. Note that the broken test has already been removed on 'core-updates'. Eric: can you push a 'python-updates' branch? I wonder if we have time for a "half-rebuild" before the next 'core-updates' round; I've got some other heavy-impact patches in my pipeline (Glib, Cairo, ++). The patch LGTM.
On Tue, 06 Nov 2018 17:00:01 +0100 Marius Bakke <mbakke@fastmail.com> wrote: > Eric Bavier <ericbavier@centurylink.net> writes: > > > Hello Mathieu, > > > > On Tue, 6 Nov 2018 14:07:47 +0900 > > Mathieu Othacehe <m.othacehe@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Hi Eric, > >> > >> Your patch seems go to me, even if I think the root cause of your problem > >> is fixed by: > >> > >> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=33186#26 > >> > >> I think that both could be applied to core-updates. > > > > Thanks for the link; it looks like it should help. But, yes, I think > > both can be applied. > > Note that the broken test has already been removed on 'core-updates'. > > Eric: can you push a 'python-updates' branch? I wonder if we have time > for a "half-rebuild" before the next 'core-updates' round; I've got some > other heavy-impact patches in my pipeline (Glib, Cairo, ++). > > The patch LGTM. Sure, I can push this to a new branch. Thanks for the review. `~Eric
On Tue, 6 Nov 2018 19:22:37 -0600 Eric Bavier <ericbavier@centurylink.net> wrote: > On Tue, 06 Nov 2018 17:00:01 +0100 > Marius Bakke <mbakke@fastmail.com> wrote: > > > Eric: can you push a 'python-updates' branch? I wonder if we have time > > for a "half-rebuild" before the next 'core-updates' round; I've got some > > other heavy-impact patches in my pipeline (Glib, Cairo, ++). > > > > The patch LGTM. > > Sure, I can push this to a new branch. Oops, there's already a 'python-updates' branch on savannah. Should that branch be deleted, or force-pushed? (sorry, haven't paid much attention to our branch management...) `~Eric
On Tue, 06 Nov 2018 17:00:01 +0100 Marius Bakke <mbakke@fastmail.com> wrote: > Eric Bavier <ericbavier@centurylink.net> writes: > > > Hello Mathieu, > > > > On Tue, 6 Nov 2018 14:07:47 +0900 > > Mathieu Othacehe <m.othacehe@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Hi Eric, > >> > >> Your patch seems go to me, even if I think the root cause of your problem > >> is fixed by: > >> > >> https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=33186#26 > >> > >> I think that both could be applied to core-updates. > > > > Thanks for the link; it looks like it should help. But, yes, I think > > both can be applied. > > Note that the broken test has already been removed on 'core-updates'. > > Eric: can you push a 'python-updates' branch? I wonder if we have time > for a "half-rebuild" before the next 'core-updates' round; I've got some > other heavy-impact patches in my pipeline (Glib, Cairo, ++). > > The patch LGTM. I've pushed this to the core-updates-next branch in commit 5b01b6034aeab32a5011c5757f18bd9772d3497d `~Eric
From 076d2f7f32a51f90f85be3da836d208987e9c678 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Eric Bavier <bavier@member.fsf.org> Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 21:18:41 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] python: Honor '--cores=...' in tests. * gnu/packages/python.scm (python-2.7)[arguments]: Add #:make-flags. --- gnu/packages/python.scm | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/gnu/packages/python.scm b/gnu/packages/python.scm index fbb280224..9a8b9dfcf 100644 --- a/gnu/packages/python.scm +++ b/gnu/packages/python.scm @@ -206,6 +206,9 @@ "--enable-unicode=ucs4" (string-append "LDFLAGS=-Wl,-rpath=" (assoc-ref %outputs "out") "/lib")) + ;; With no -j argument tests use all available cpus, so provide one. + #:make-flags + (list (format #f "EXTRATESTOPTS=-j~d" (parallel-job-count))) #:modules ((ice-9 ftw) (ice-9 match) (guix build utils) (guix build gnu-build-system)) -- 2.19.1