Messages in this thread | | | From | Masahiro Yamada <> | Date | Mon, 7 Aug 2023 11:23:36 +0900 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v6 0/7] refactor file signing program |
| |
On Thu, Jun 1, 2023 at 6:08 PM Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 01, 2023 at 02:33:23PM +0530, Shreenidhi Shedi wrote: > > On Wed, 31-May-2023 22:20, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 09:01:24PM +0530, Shreenidhi Shedi wrote: > > > > On Wed, 31-May-2023 20:08, Greg KH wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 04:14:49PM +0530, Shreenidhi Shedi wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 22-Mar-2023 01:03, Shreenidhi Shedi wrote: > > > > > > Can you please review the latest patch series? I think I have addressed your > > > > > > concerns. Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > The big question is, "who is going to use these new features"? This > > > > > tool is only used by the in-kernel build scripts, and if they do not > > > > > take advantage of these new options you have added, why are they needed? > > > > > > > > > > thanks, > > > > > > > > > > greg k-h > > > > > > > > Hi Greg, > > > > > > > > Thanks for the response. > > > > > > > > We use it in VMware Photon OS. Following is the link for the same. > > > > https://github.com/vmware/photon/blob/master/SPECS/linux/spec_install_post.inc#L4 > > > > > > > > If this change goes in, it will give a slight push to our build performance. > > > > > > What exactly do you mean by "slight push"? > > > > Instead of invoking the signing tool binary for each module, we can pass > > modules in bulk and it will reduce the build time by couple of seconds. > > Then why not modify the in-kernel build system to also do this, allowing > everyone to save time and money (i.e. energy)? > > Why keep the build savings to yourself? > > thanks, > > greg k-h
If I understand correctly, "sign-file: add support to sign modules in bulk" is the only benefit in the patchset.
I tested the bulk option, but I did not see build savings.
My evaluation: 1. 'make allmodconfig all', then 'make modules_install'. (9476 modules installed)
2. I ran 'perf stat' for single signing vs bulk signing (5 runs for each). I changed the -n option in scripts/signfile.sh
A. single sign
Sign one module per scripts/sign-file invocation.
find "${MODULES_PATH}" -name *.ko -type f -print0 | \ xargs -r -0 -P$(nproc) -x -n1 sh -c "..."
Performance counter stats for './signfile-single.sh' (5 runs):
22.33 +- 2.26 seconds time elapsed ( +- 10.12% )
B. bulk sign
Sign 32 modules per scripts/sign-file invocation
find "${MODULES_PATH}" -name *.ko -type f -print0 | \ xargs -r -0 -P$(nproc) -x -n32 sh -c "..."
Performance counter stats for './signfile-bulk.sh' (5 runs):
24.78 +- 3.01 seconds time elapsed ( +- 12.14% )
The bulk option decreases the process forks of scripts/sign-file but I did not get even "slight push".
-- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada
| |