From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3074 invoked by alias); 2 Nov 2010 16:25:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 3024 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Nov 2010 16:25:21 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,TW_GC,TW_IB,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 16:25:14 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id oA2GPCYJ026755 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 2 Nov 2010 12:25:12 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id oA2GPCD4022130; Tue, 2 Nov 2010 12:25:12 -0400 Received: from [10.3.113.73] (ovpn-113-73.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.73]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id oA2GP1st017389; Tue, 2 Nov 2010 12:25:04 -0400 Message-ID: <4CD03B55.6080508@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2010 16:25:00 -0000 From: Jeff Law User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100921 Fedora/3.1.4-1.fc13 Lightning/1.0b3pre Thunderbird/3.1.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Tromey CC: Diego Novillo , Ian Lance Taylor , Andrew Haley , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, java@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, java-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: PATCH RFA: Do not build java by default References: <4CCF8804.6020203@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact java-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: java-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-11/txt/msg00022.txt.bz2 On 11/02/10 09:35, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Jeff" == Jeff Law writes: > Jeff> Building libjava (at least for me) is primarily painful due to 2 files > Jeff> (the names escape me) and the rather poor coarse level parallelism > Jeff> (can't build the 32bit and 64bit multilibs in parallel for example). > > Jeff> Has anyone looked at fixing the build machinery for libjava to make it > Jeff> more sensible? > > Nope. AFAIK it is already as parallelized as possible, but it has been > a while since I looked at it. > > I thought the really bad file (HTML_401F.java, IIRC) had some functions > split up so that it wasn't so evil any more. It's the libgcj_tools_la-tools which gets built twice for each architecture and its build seems to always fire off last and takes a few minutes for each compilation. > The multilib thing sounds like a top-level problem of some kind. > At least, I don't recall that libjava does anything special here. Yea, I suspect the way multilibs are handled is far from ideal from a parallel make standpoint. Fixing the underlying multilib goop may be ugly, but probably would have a nice benefit across the various runtime libraries we utilize. jeff