From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andrea Corallo via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#43269: 28.0.50; [feature/native-comp] provide a user feedback on Emacs being native compiled Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2020 21:51:53 +0000 Message-ID: References: <83wo15msrj.fsf@gnu.org> <83tuw9mmfe.fsf@gnu.org> <83sgbtm2d3.fsf@gnu.org> <062E9DA2-B039-4AAD-802B-7333971F5B73@gnu.org> <83ft7smjcd.fsf@gnu.org> <83h7s7kpfr.fsf@gnu.org> <83wo13j5i1.fsf@gnu.org> <83tuw6kgyd.fsf@gnu.org> <83sgbqkc32.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Andrea Corallo Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="38153"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) Cc: rms@gnu.org, arthur.miller@live.com, 43269@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Sep 09 23:52:11 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kG80g-0009mT-L1 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 09 Sep 2020 23:52:10 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59940 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kG80f-00015x-73 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 09 Sep 2020 17:52:09 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:45160) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kG80Y-00015i-Eb for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Sep 2020 17:52:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:51683) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kG80Y-0006u1-5h for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Sep 2020 17:52:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kG80Y-00013c-55 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Sep 2020 17:52:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Andrea Corallo Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2020 21:52:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 43269 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 43269-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B43269.15996883204056 (code B ref 43269); Wed, 09 Sep 2020 21:52:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 43269) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Sep 2020 21:52:00 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34996 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kG80V-00013M-Sg for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 09 Sep 2020 17:52:00 -0400 Original-Received: from mab.sdf.org ([205.166.94.33]:43306 helo=ma.sdf.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kG80T-00013E-Pq for 43269@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 09 Sep 2020 17:51:58 -0400 Original-Received: from akrl by ma.sdf.org with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kG80P-0001GW-BL; Wed, 09 Sep 2020 21:51:53 +0000 In-Reply-To: <83sgbqkc32.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 09 Sep 2020 22:02:41 +0300") X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:187706 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: Andrea Corallo >> Cc: rms@gnu.org, arthur.miller@live.com, 43269@debbugs.gnu.org >> Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2020 18:15:51 +0000 >> >> > So what do you have there, an i9 CPU? In any case, 4 min with -j16 is >> > quite a lot. >> >> It's Xeon from three yeas ago (8 real cores). It's 4 mins because our >> build is not very parallel. >> >> But that said I think what matters it the total CPU time (here ~30min) >> to be compared against the same for the vanilla build (~12min). This is >> about what one would get at -j1. > > No, what matters to users is the elapsed time. And that cannot be > simply estimated as the total CPU time. To my knowledge and for my experience with this workload this is a decent estimation of the conversion factor. It should be said that, as we have improved compilation speed already by about a factor five, we may be able to improve it further. But this is where we stand today. > Anyway, thanks for the data (and all your hard work on this). Welcome, I really enjoy to work on this with you all. Andrea