Bug 2148616

May be helpful to compare with https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/clblast/blob/rawhide/f/clblast.spec 
There are tests available:
https://github.com/clMathLibraries/clBLAS/tree/master/src/tests
Can these be run with POCL?

Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed



===== MUST items =====

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
     BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
     other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
     Guidelines.
[?]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
     found: "Unknown or generated", "Apache License 2.0", "*No copyright*
     Apache License 2.0", "Public domain", "*No copyright* [generated
     file]". 192 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /home/fedora-review/2148616-clBLAS/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[?]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
     names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
     Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[?]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
     one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
     license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
     license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
     beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
     work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
     provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
     %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

===== SHOULD items =====

Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
     file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in clBLAS-
     devel
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
     publishes signatures.
     Note: gpgverify is not used.
[!]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[!]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
     files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
     $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

===== EXTRA items =====

Generic:
[?]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
     is arched.
     Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 1658880 bytes in /usr/share
[x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s).
     Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: clBLAS-2.12-1.fc38.x86_64.rpm
          clBLAS-devel-2.12-1.fc38.x86_64.rpm
          clBLAS-debuginfo-2.12-1.fc38.x86_64.rpm
          clBLAS-debugsource-2.12-1.fc38.x86_64.rpm
          clBLAS-2.12-1.fc38.src.rpm
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.4.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmp7jbuihdw')]
checks: 31, packages: 5

clBLAS-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary clBLAS-tune
clBLAS-devel.x86_64: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/clBLAS/doc/performance/cuBLAS_7.5/Tesla_K40/peak_dp.csv /usr/share/clBLAS/doc/performance/cuBLAS_7.0/Tesla_K40/peak_dp.csv
clBLAS-devel.x86_64: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/clBLAS/doc/performance/cuBLAS_7.5/Tesla_K40/peak_sp.csv /usr/share/clBLAS/doc/performance/cuBLAS_7.0/Tesla_K40/peak_sp.csv
 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 5.1 s 




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: clBLAS-debuginfo-2.12-1.fc38.x86_64.rpm
          clBLAS-devel-debuginfo-2.12-1.fc38.x86_64.rpm
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.4.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpgs0sijz8')]
checks: 31, packages: 2

 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 1.7 s 





Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.4.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
checks: 31, packages: 5

clBLAS-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary clBLAS-tune
clBLAS-devel.x86_64: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/clBLAS/doc/performance/cuBLAS_7.5/Tesla_K40/peak_dp.csv /usr/share/clBLAS/doc/performance/cuBLAS_7.0/Tesla_K40/peak_dp.csv
clBLAS-devel.x86_64: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/clBLAS/doc/performance/cuBLAS_7.5/Tesla_K40/peak_sp.csv /usr/share/clBLAS/doc/performance/cuBLAS_7.0/Tesla_K40/peak_sp.csv
 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 15.5 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/clMathLibraries/clBLAS/archive/cf9113982fdfc994297d372785ce76eb80911af2/clBLAS-cf91139.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 5211309f9f83b0920a816f8a0ead47f26cccfaad0ad9f8651266f74ee676c38f
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 5211309f9f83b0920a816f8a0ead47f26cccfaad0ad9f8651266f74ee676c38f


Requires
--------
clBLAS (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit)
    libOpenCL.so.1()(64bit)
    libOpenCL.so.1(OPENCL_1.0)(64bit)
    libOpenCL.so.1(OPENCL_1.1)(64bit)
    libOpenCL.so.1(OPENCL_1.2)(64bit)
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit)
    libm.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

clBLAS-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/pkg-config
    cmake-filesystem(x86-64)
    libOpenCL.so.1()(64bit)
    libOpenCL.so.1(OPENCL_1.0)(64bit)
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libclBLAS.so.2()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit)
    libm.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

clBLAS-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

clBLAS-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):



Provides
--------
clBLAS:
    clBLAS
    clBLAS(x86-64)
    libclBLAS.so.2()(64bit)

clBLAS-devel:
    clBLAS-devel
    clBLAS-devel(x86-64)
    cmake(clBLAS)
    cmake(clblas)
    pkgconfig(clBLAS)

clBLAS-debuginfo:
    clBLAS-debuginfo
    clBLAS-debuginfo(x86-64)
    debuginfo(build-id)
    libclBLAS.so.2.12.0-2.12-1.fc38.x86_64.debug()(64bit)

clBLAS-debugsource:
    clBLAS-debugsource
    clBLAS-debugsource(x86-64)



Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2148616
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: C/C++, Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: fonts, Python, R, Perl, Haskell, Ocaml, Ruby, SugarActivity, Java, PHP
Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH


$ rpmlint clBLAS-2.12-1.fc38.src.rpm
================================================== rpmlint session starts ==================================================
rpmlint: 2.4.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
checks: 31, packages: 1

=================== 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.8 s ===================

$ rpmlint clBLAS-2.12-1.fc38.x86_64.rpm
================================================== rpmlint session starts ==================================================
rpmlint: 2.4.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
checks: 31, packages: 1

=================== 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 2.5 s ===================

$ rpmlint  clBLAS-devel-2.12-1.fc38.x86_64.rpm
================================================== rpmlint session starts ==================================================
rpmlint: 2.4.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
checks: 31, packages: 1

clBLAS-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary clBLAS-tune
clBLAS-devel.x86_64: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/clBLAS/doc/performance/cuBLAS_7.5/Tesla_K40/peak_dp.csv /usr/share/clBLAS/doc/performance/cuBLAS_7.0/Tesla_K40/peak_dp.csv
clBLAS-devel.x86_64: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/clBLAS/doc/performance/cuBLAS_7.5/Tesla_K40/peak_sp.csv /usr/share/clBLAS/doc/performance/cuBLAS_7.0/Tesla_K40/peak_sp.csv
=================== 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.5 s ===================


Comments:
a) Public domain files
Public domain
-------------
clBLAS-cf9113982fdfc994297d372785ce76eb80911af2/src/include/md5sum.h
clBLAS-cf9113982fdfc994297d372785ce76eb80911af2/src/library/common/md5sum.c
Can public domain code be included?
b) Build log has messages such as:
#pragma message("cl_version.h: CL_TARGET_OPENCL_VERSION is not defined. Defaulting to 300 (OpenCL 3.0)")
Is this a reasonable default?
There are also a few buffer overflow warnings. Unclear if upstream will take fixes.
c) Use cp -p and cp -pr to preserve timestamps
d) Maybe the performance information in usr/share/clBLAS/doc/performance can go into a subpackage?
e) Use SPDX license identifier Apache-2.0 see https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/allowed-licenses/

I have also looked at clblast 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2144680
It has a pretty good comparison benchmark with clblas, having to manually setup clblas to do that comparison is what led to this package.
part of this clblast change is to deal with pocl not being available on epel.
pocl not being in epel I have tried to address much earlier here
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2096075
The tricky bit being how llvm libraries are delivered on rhel.
checking with pocl could be done if pocl was installed and triggered with
rpmbuild -ba --with check 
with the medium test being done, this takes a pretty long time with an nvidia card so it will likely take a very long time with pocl.
In production i do not think pocl+clblast,clblas is a good fit, there are many other (better?) tuned cpu only blas libraries. Even so the clbast vs cpu is soooo bad when compared to clblast vs cuda,clblas.

a - can you clarify what you are asking about public domain ? 
b.1 - this happens with all of the opencl project i have built recently even pocl.
b.2 - i'll look into the warnings.
c - ok, will change
d - i would rather not have a separate subpackage and will remove doc/performance
e - ok

a) There are two files which are public domain. The license field in the spec should be updated to reflect this.
A breakdown of the licensing should also be added to the spec, ie. indicate the two files which are public domain
and indicate rest of files are Apache 2.
b1) Can you do
Export CL_TARGET_OPENCL_VERSION=3
or
Export CL_TARGET_OPENCL_VERSION=2
Maybe some discussion is needed on the mailing list or heterogeneous sig
as to reasonable defaults for this.

Other comments:

May want to use the macro %{_docdir} see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Tibbs/RPMMacros

If the tests take a long time, make them conditional, and try some of the samples:
https://github.com/clMathLibraries/clBLAS/tree/master/src/samples

Spec URL: https://trix.fedorapeople.org/clBLAS.spec
SRPM URL: https://trix.fedorapeople.org/clBLAS-2.12-2.20170323git7ec40a2.fc38.src.rpm

Using a sample to check depended on a non top of tree commit to run on pocl.
Thus the new git style suffix.

docs have been removed.

For md5sum Public Domain added to License: tag.
This is not a significant use, it's md5sum() is called once.

opencl version set in patch0

the format warnings fixed in patch1

I am carrying both in my fork
https://github.com/trixirt/clBLAS/commits/fedora

Thanks. Will go through this in the next day or so.

I am looking at resolving this blocking issue
https://github.com/clMathLibraries/clBLAS/issues/341
Do not bother working on this until then

https://github.com/codeplaysoftware/sycl-blas may also be interesting