From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:40564) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hCntL-0008Da-Ft for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Apr 2019 12:10:04 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hCntK-0003xm-Jz for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Apr 2019 12:10:03 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:33870) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hCntK-0003wk-CY for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Apr 2019 12:10:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hCntK-00089d-6L for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Apr 2019 12:10:02 -0400 Subject: [bug#35126] [PATCH] gnu: rust: Enable parallel tests starting with 1.26. Resent-Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Ivan Petkov In-Reply-To: <20190406124815.0d448082@scratchpost.org> Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2019 09:09:13 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <90EB17C1-533B-4E1A-8709-990CF41D6E82@gmail.com> References: <20190403170044.21420-1-dannym@scratchpost.org> <20190404202929.7b932d3b@scratchpost.org> <20190405161107.18d254ce@scratchpost.org> <0957487E-757F-438D-995E-3118F9AB6C92@gmail.com> <20190406124815.0d448082@scratchpost.org> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: Danny Milosavljevic Cc: 35126@debbugs.gnu.org > On Apr 6, 2019, at 3:48 AM, Danny Milosavljevic = wrote: >=20 > On Fri, 5 Apr 2019 08:36:44 -0700 > Ivan Petkov wrote: >=20 >> Hi Danny, >>=20 >>> On Apr 5, 2019, at 7:11 AM, Danny Milosavljevic = wrote: >>>=20 >>> Should we limit the number of parallel jobs? I think at least armhf = is going >>> to be very overloaded otherwise. To which value? =20 >>=20 >> Do the armhf builders define that they have fewer cores available? >>=20 >> If not, we could cap the max jobs to 2, although it would be nice to = potentially >> use as many cores as are available for non-armhf builds. >=20 > I think the problem is RAM usage. Arm machines have little RAM and = will choke > if too many memory-expensive things run in parallel. I=E2=80=99d anticipate that building rustc itself would be the most = memory intense operation, I think most of the individual tests aren=E2=80=99t anywhere nearly as = big=E2=80=A6 =E2=80=94Ivan=