[apparmor] [PATCH] parser: add basic support for parallel compiles and loads

[John Johansen]

On 11/30/2015 02:42 PM, apparmor at raf.org wrote:
> apparmor at raf.org wrote:
> 
>> Seth Arnold wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 09:02:18PM -0800, John Johansen wrote:
>>>> This check is well above the range of values I would recommend (some
>>>> where between 1-2x the number of cpus. More jobs can help with smaller
>>>
>>> Two times makes more sense for most CPUs but eight may be more appropriate
>>> for e.g. POWER8 systems; I don't know if the online CPUs count includes
>>> only cores or if the hardware threads are reported too. If only cores,
>>> then even eight might be low for those beasts but if threads are reported
>>> too, this might be high for even them. But _some_ limit is certainly best,
>>> and this is as good a starting point as any inthe absense of data.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>
>> i thought arbitrary limits based on no data that are imposed on users
>> by programmers were generally considered to be a bad idea (at least by
>> the GNU people, anyway). if there's doubt, why not just let the user
>> determine what works well on their system and what doesn't? just a thought.
> 
> by the way, on my 2 core, 4 thread, core i3, sysconf(_SC_NPROCESSORS_ONLN))
> reports the number of hardware threads (4), not the number of cores (2).
> 
raf, thanks for the data point.