Bug 1417385
| Summary: | FTBFS with GCC-7 on PPC64LE | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Björn 'besser82' Esser <besser82> | ||||
| Component: | openblas | Assignee: | Susi Lehtola <susi.lehtola> | ||||
| Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> | ||||
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |||||
| Priority: | unspecified | ||||||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | anto.trande, awilliam, besser82, dominik, jakub, jskarvad, negativo17, plautrba, rc040203, susi.lehtola, tcallawa, tom | ||||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||||||
| Target Release: | --- | ||||||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||||||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||||||
| URL: | https://github.com/xianyi/OpenBLAS/issues/1078 | ||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||
| Fixed In Version: | openblas-0.2.19-7.fc26 | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | ||||
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||||||
| Last Closed: | 2017-02-13 22:20:03 UTC | Type: | Bug | ||||
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | ||||
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |||||
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |||||
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |||||
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |||||
| Embargoed: | |||||||
| Bug Depends On: | |||||||
| Bug Blocks: | 1418471, 1423089, 1423094, 1423097, 1423258, 1423528, 1423581, 1423618, 1423695, 1423851, 1423920, 1423998, 1424105, 1424439, 1424443 | ||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
@jakub: Or might that be another PPC64LE bug in GCC-7? Can you attach preprocessed source that reproduces it? Unfortunately not, since I don't own any PPC64LE metal… That error can be reproduced building openblas in Rawhide on Koji. This is last build, I made: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17540767 Hope, that helps you. Filed as GCC PR79343, we'll see if it is openblas bug or gcc bug. So openblas bug, see http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-7/changes.html for details. Added upstream issue in URL-field… This is blocking scalapack->elpa->cp2k for me (I maintain the last two). I have a ppc64le VM if anyone wants to debug on the actual hardware. *** Bug 1419489 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Could we possibly ExcludeArch ppc64 until this is resolved? Or disable use of inline asm for ppc64 until then (if there is any fallback C/Fortran code). Alan Modra from IBM is already working on fixing the inline asm for power-8 (In reply to Björn "besser82" Esser from comment #11) > Alan Modra from IBM is already working on fixing the inline asm for power-8 When can a solution to the blockade openblas causes be expected? IMHO, should this bug not be fixed by the end of this week, I'm with Spot and am leaning towards ExcludeArch'ing the ppc64le for openblas or to request to drop the ppc64le from Fedora's distros, due to lack of toolchain usability. (In reply to Ralf Corsepius from comment #12) > request to drop the ppc64le from Fedora's distros, due to lack of toolchain > usability. This is openblas package bug, so why do you talk about toolchain usability? It worked by accident in the past, has been buggy since the inline asm has been added for power8. ExcludeArch won't really help unless we also apply it to everything that depends (directly or indirectly) on openblas, and I fear that it quite a large set of packages. (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #13) > (In reply to Ralf Corsepius from comment #12) > > request to drop the ppc64le from Fedora's distros, due to lack of toolchain > > usability. > > This is openblas package bug, so why do you talk about toolchain usability? > It worked by accident in the past, has been buggy since the inline asm has > been added for power8. The ppc64le had not been a fedora-supported architecture. => This now has impacts on all fedora architectures, which qualifies as an overall regression to Fedora, IMHO. (In reply to Tom Hughes from comment #14) > ExcludeArch won't really help unless we also apply it to everything that > depends (directly or indirectly) on openblas, and I fear that it quite a > large set of packages. Correct. One would have implement some rpm-macros to have all deps of this package excluded. IIRC, some qt-packages already are doing this, unless I am mistake also because of the ppc64le. (In reply to Ralf Corsepius from comment #15) > IIRC, some qt-packages already are doing this, unless I am > mistake also because of the ppc64le. Just found it - It's qtwebengine, which does not seem to support the ppc64* at all. The Fedora-qt-folks apparently resorted to implement a %qt5_qtwebengine_arches macro in /usr/lib/rpm/macros.d/macros.qt5-srpm provided through package qt5-srpm-macros, all qt5-webengine using packages are supposed to Require. c.f. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1298011 Delicate about this is, that qtwebengines is the designated replacement the notoriously vulnerable qtwebkit* variants. This means we like have to retire applications from the ppc64* soon. There is progress going on upstream: https://github.com/xianyi/OpenBLAS/issues/1078#issuecomment-278542809 It looks there will be a patch (or a new release, maybe) solving this issue pretty soon. *** Bug 1421710 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Just applied the fixing patch. Build should be finished soon. Thanks, rebuilding scalapack now. Thanks HPL rebuilt OK. freefem++ and OpenSceneGraph rebuilt. |
Created attachment 1245409 [details] build.log on PPC64LE Description of problem: FTBFS with GCC-7 on PPC64LE. See attached build.log. How reproducible: 100% Steps to Reproduce: 1. Rebuild for libgfortran on GCC-7. 2. Build fails on PPC64LE Actual results: Build fails with `error: PIC register clobbered by '%2' in 'asm'`. Expected results: Build succeds as expected.