This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] gcc parallel make check
- From: Mike Stump <mikestump at comcast dot net>
- To: David Malcolm <dmalcolm at redhat dot com>
- Cc: VandeVondele Joost <joost dot vandevondele at mat dot ethz dot ch>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org" <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 13:57:35 -0700
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] gcc parallel make check
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <908103EDB4893A42920B21D3568BFD93150F4103 at MBX23 dot d dot ethz dot ch> <20140905143740 dot GL17454 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <908103EDB4893A42920B21D3568BFD93150F414C at MBX23 dot d dot ethz dot ch> ,<20140905145304 dot GM17454 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> ,<908103EDB4893A42920B21D3568BFD93150F7F45 at MBX23 dot d dot ethz dot ch> <908103EDB4893A42920B21D3568BFD93150F816B at MBX23 dot d dot ethz dot ch> <229476F6-B901-4C6E-AE0B-3A53521AE996 at comcast dot net> <1410381512 dot 28338 dot 9 dot camel at surprise>
On Sep 10, 2014, at 1:38 PM, David Malcolm <dmalcolm@redhat.com> wrote:
> Perhaps this is a silly question, but has anyone tried going the whole
> way and not having buckets, going to an extremely fine-grained approach
No, we fear the overhead, but do not know what it is.