Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

kpatch-build: allow the number of make jobs to be specified using CPUS #732

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 7, 2017

Conversation

gktrk
Copy link
Contributor

@gktrk gktrk commented Aug 29, 2017

Instead of always using the maximum number of CPUs available, allow
user to tune the number of make jobs using the environment variable
CPUS.

@gktrk
Copy link
Contributor Author

gktrk commented Aug 29, 2017

Though I wonder if we should leave CPUS alone and use JOBS instead, defaulting to CPUS if not given

@jpoimboe
Copy link
Member

I think I'd prefer an optional -j command-line option, which can be passed on to make. If the option isn't specified then we can keep the default. What do you think?

@gktrk
Copy link
Contributor Author

gktrk commented Sep 5, 2017

Agreed. How about the newly pushed code?

@jpoimboe
Copy link
Member

jpoimboe commented Sep 6, 2017

Looks good, thanks @gktrk!

👍

@gktrk
Copy link
Contributor Author

gktrk commented Sep 6, 2017

I just realized that I forgot to update the commit message when I amended it. Will update that and push again.

Instead of always using the maximum number of CPUs available, allow
user to tune the number of make jobs using the command line argument
('-j', '--jobs').
@gktrk
Copy link
Contributor Author

gktrk commented Sep 6, 2017

Commit message updated

@jpoimboe
Copy link
Member

jpoimboe commented Sep 6, 2017

👍

@joe-lawrence
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @gktrk ... (btw, since there is a corresponding commit in the elivepatch-server project, I wonder if the make "--load-average" option is also interesting for your use case.)

@joe-lawrence joe-lawrence merged commit 1719f9e into dynup:master Sep 7, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants