bin | ||
.bazelrc | ||
.build.yml | ||
.envrc | ||
.gitignore | ||
BUILD | ||
LICENSE | ||
main.cc | ||
README.md | ||
WORKSPACE |
bazel-zig-cc and llvm
bazel-zig-cc has a performance issue when compiling many files. This repository reproduces that.
The test
Compiles 64 small binaries with bazel-zig-cc and llvm14. The tests were run on an x86_64 8-core machine running Ubuntu 22.04.
Steps to reproduce
Baseline is llvm14: 12-13 seconds:
bazel --batch clean; bazel --batch build --extra_toolchains=@llvm_toolchain//:cc-toolchain-x86_64-linux ...
INFO: Elapsed time: 12.454s, Critical Path: 1.11s
zig cc without the sandbox. Which means different invocations of zig cc
will
see that all files in zig_lib_dir
are the same file. 17 seconds:
bazel --batch clean; bazel --batch build --spawn_strategy=local --platforms=@zig_sdk//libc_aware/platform:linux_amd64_gnu.2.28 ...
INFO: Elapsed time: 17.021s, Critical Path: 1.67s
zig cc with --sandbox_base=/dev/shm
: all sandbox files, including the
zig_sdk, are put to /dev/shm
. However, they are all symlinks, which means zig
will re-hash all it's dependencies. 42 seconds:
bazel --batch clean; bazel --batch build --sandbox_base=/dev/shm --platforms=@zig_sdk//libc_aware/platform:linux_amd64_gnu.2.28 ...
INFO: Elapsed time: 42.251s, Critical Path: 5.26s
zig cc plain: 142 seconds. Sandbox is on a real disk, which means it will take even longer to re-hash all its dependencies:
bazel --batch clean; bazel --batch build --platforms=@zig_sdk//libc_aware/platform:linux_amd64_gnu.2.28 ...
INFO: Elapsed time: 142.264s, Critical Path: 20.65s
Similar to --config=hermetic-sandbox
. Which means there is something else at
play, not only re-hashing the sandbox files:
bazel --batch clean; bazel --batch build --platforms=@zig_sdk//libc_aware/platform:linux_amd64_gnu.2.28 ...
INFO: Elapsed time: 136.957s, Critical Path: 18.14s