Re: sphinx-build parallel build failures (was Re: [PATCH v3] target/i386: Add Snowridge-v2 (no MPX) CPU model)

[Eduardo Habkost]

On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 01:02:44PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Oct 2019 at 14:52, Eduardo Habkost <address@hidden> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 07:40:30PM +0800, Xiaoyao Li wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2019-10-12 at 01:56 -0700, address@hidden wrote:
> > > > Patchew URL:
> > > > https://patchew.org/QEMU/address@hidden/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > This series failed the docker-mingw@fedora build test. Please find the 
> > > > testing
> > > > commands and
> > > > their output below. If you have Docker installed, you can probably 
> > > > reproduce
> > > > it
> > > > locally.
> > > >
> > > > === TEST SCRIPT BEGIN ===
> > > > #! /bin/bash
> > > > export ARCH=x86_64
> > > > make docker-image-fedora V=1 NETWORK=1
> > > > time make docker-test-mingw@fedora J=14 NETWORK=1
> > > > === TEST SCRIPT END ===
> > > >
> > > >   CC      stubs/machine-init-done.o
> > > >   CC      stubs/migr-blocker.o
> > > >   CC      stubs/change-state-handler.o
> > > > make: *** [Makefile:994: docs/interop/index.html] Error 2
> > > > make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> >
> > This looks like the sphinx-build parallel build failures I am
> > also seeing in my builds:
> > https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/issues/2946
> 
> Could you send your workaround patch:
> https://github.com/ehabkost/qemu-hacks/commit/569f1dcb5764fccd5942ebbe39d3a8ed91cd632b
> to qemu-devel? It seems like a reasonable way to avoid
> the problem (just use different doctrees) and less complicated
> than trying to serialize the two builds in the QEMU makefiles.
> I think my only review comment would be to add a couple of
> comment lines to the makefile, something like:
>  # Note use of different doctrees for each (manual, builder) tuple;
>  # this works around Sphinx not handling parallel invocation on
>  # a single doctree: https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/issues/2946
> 
> so we don't forget why we had to do this.
> 
> If you do that you can add my
> Reviewed-by: Peter Maydell <address@hidden>
> tag when you send the patch.

Done, including the comment you've suggested above and your
Reviewed-by line.  Thanks!

-- 
Eduardo