15226 2023-10-09 08:21:52 +0000 Add benchmark for buildtime vs build machine specs ? 2026-10-23 08:13:37 +0000 1 1 9 Documentation Development Manual development unspecified x86 Multiple NEW Medium enhancement 6.2 M4 1 yoann.congal antonin.godard randy.macleod ross.burton yoann.congal --- --- Yes (doc changes required) oldest_to_newest 96663 0 yoann.congal 2023-10-09 08:21:52 +0000 Following this discussion on IRC: <LetoThe2nd> rburton: time bitbake core-image-sato on the new box:real 83m32.211s user 0m25.560s sys 0m10.779s <yocton> LetoThe2nd: Nice! It got me thinking... Shouldn't we put some of these number somewhere in the doc? It would give the user the ballpark of the build time they are looking at... <LetoThe2nd> yocton: ross said he has a table for it, and probably it is public Maybe some builtime values for some build machine specs interest users? 96685 1 randy.macleod 2023-10-12 14:39:15 +0000 A wiki page with the info and document the benchmark is what Richard suggested. -- YP bug review 96692 2 ross.burton 2023-10-12 14:57:37 +0000 A wiki would be sensible. My only comments are: - build times should have a date so we can tell how old they are - build times should be clear what branch and sha, and bitbake target they built My super-ghetto benchmark is: # a LTS for stability $ git checkout origin/kirkstone # oe-init-build-env anewbuildtree # fetch all the sources up front $ bitbake core-image-sato --runall fetch $ time bitbake core-image-sato So if we're collating build times, I'd suggest using the latest LTS so the results stay relevant for longer. 96712 3 michael.opdenacker 2023-10-16 14:49:04 +0000 I'm not sure about what we're thinking about here. A wiki page with build time for reference images on different build machines? There are so many possible host configurations (Poky release, host distro, host CPU, amount and type of RAM, storage type) that I don't see how readers could make use of such information. IMHO, if we want to track the evolution of build time in a useful way, we should do this through the autobuilder. 96713 4 yoann.congal 2023-10-16 15:30:28 +0000 > I'm not sure about what we're thinking about here. > A wiki page with build time for reference images on different build machines? Yes, that would be a good idea IMHO. > There are so many possible host configurations (Poky release, host distro, host CPU, amount and type of RAM, storage type) that I don't see how readers could make use of such information. This would help a user choosing specs for a Yocto machine. I've got this question on various channels quite frequently. Something like buildtime for core-image-minimal/sato on : a normal desktop, a beefy build server, a laptop, ... This would give an idea of budget vs buildtime. Obviously, this would be deprecated as soon as it is written but still help. > IMHO, if we want to track the evolution of build time in a useful way, we should do this through the autobuilder. Buildtime on autobuilder could be a datapoint :) 100021 5 randy.macleod 2024-10-24 15:04:02 +0000 Bulk move of 5.1 M4 to 5.2 M2 as approved by AlexB. 102179 6 antonin.godard 2025-06-06 07:42:30 +0000 Bulk move of bugs I am assigned to from Milestone 5.2M4 to 5.3M1.