From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jul 20 07:27:31 2021 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Jul 2021 11:27:31 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:32960 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m5nuN-0005cC-JD for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 07:27:31 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:51560) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m5nuL-0005c4-Bk for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 07:27:29 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:33640) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m5nuL-0007QZ-4t for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 07:27:29 -0400 Received: from andre.telenet-ops.be ([2a02:1800:120:4::f00:15]:46464) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m5nuI-0001M9-Th for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 07:27:28 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([IPv6:2a02:1811:8c09:9d00:aaf1:9810:a0b8:a55d]) by andre.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id XPTN2500L0mfAB401PTNYv; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 13:27:23 +0200 From: Maxime Devos To: guix-patches@gnu.org Subject: [PATCH core-updates] gnu: guile: Fix failing tests on i686-linux. Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2021 13:27:12 +0200 Message-Id: <20210720112712.25905-1-maximedevos@telenet.be> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.32.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telenet.be; s=r21; t=1626780443; bh=EZ6BjkK2kPHZ5xv8vpBk0mtMEBY49QXxBp998Gdnjfk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date; b=EBEocgOgk09YYyHjCUAbvZ44k/BmTesd/yn8aTHBbG/MSe6QislWz0Zv8vipU53bM Z/Pjj8Q8e6xKpQbf070PrI3+Rl6hFim08Sw2LrPdHhpWGVwXBH4Zdk1HCNa0eggM/Z ABow8ed9DJTz66PcribDaJaLGF6ePA2QRe0OwBzMOSWOVzfH6mtB+fzc5SRg3966ZF k5gXpjJYn+HXbBHaOxoh4m1pkYSm5fgNr6KBaiN7n4kQf6ZQxfpt8qLA88Bhz/BHtf dpUoikBvLb212HWAgl6hu/qJbbKG4zIsXL3Vmhg8OJhMd4PD0QM/4t8zcBdyYs0DXC d1ODkWI65x0GQ== Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a02:1800:120:4::f00:15; envelope-from=maximedevos@telenet.be; helo=andre.telenet-ops.be X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit Cc: Maxime Devos X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) i586-gnu might have the same issue. * gnu/packages/guile.scm (guile-3.0)[arguments]<#:configure-flags>: Add "-fexcess-precision=standard" to CFLAGS. --- gnu/packages/guile.scm | 6 +++++- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/gnu/packages/guile.scm b/gnu/packages/guile.scm index d78c57e88c..e1f6495837 100644 --- a/gnu/packages/guile.scm +++ b/gnu/packages/guile.scm @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@ ;;; Copyright © 2018 Eric Bavier ;;; Copyright © 2019 Taylan Kammer ;;; Copyright © 2020, 2021 Efraim Flashner +;;; Copyright © 2021 Maxime Devos ;;; ;;; This file is part of GNU Guix. ;;; @@ -316,7 +317,10 @@ without requiring the source code to be rewritten.") (arguments (substitute-keyword-arguments (package-arguments guile-2.2) ((#:configure-flags flags ''()) - (let ((flags `(cons "--enable-mini-gmp" ,flags))) + ;; -fexcess-precision=standard is required when compiling for + ;; i686-linux, otherwise "numbers.test" will fail. + (let ((flags `(cons* "CFLAGS=-g -O2 -fexcess-precision=standard" + "--enable-mini-gmp" ,flags))) ;; XXX: JIT-enabled Guile crashes in obscure ways on GNU/Hurd. (if (hurd-target?) `(cons "--disable-jit" ,flags) -- 2.32.0 From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jul 20 09:56:08 2021 Received: (at 49659) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Jul 2021 13:56:08 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34971 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m5qE8-0008Sf-GA for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 09:56:08 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:36874) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m5qE6-0008Rh-02 for 49659@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 09:56:02 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:44822) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m5qDz-0000dO-SC; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 09:55:55 -0400 Received: from [2001:660:6102:320:e120:2c8f:8909:cdfe] (port=42890 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m5qDw-0002Mr-BL; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 09:55:52 -0400 From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= To: Maxime Devos Subject: Re: bug#49659: [PATCH core-updates] gnu: guile: Fix failing tests on i686-linux. References: <20210720112712.25905-1-maximedevos@telenet.be> Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2021 15:55:49 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20210720112712.25905-1-maximedevos@telenet.be> (Maxime Devos's message of "Tue, 20 Jul 2021 13:27:12 +0200") Message-ID: <871r7tks2i.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -0.8 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 49659 Cc: 49659@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.8 (-) Hi! Maxime Devos skribis: > i586-gnu might have the same issue. Please add a =E2=80=9CFixes =E2=80=A6=E2=80=9D line. > * gnu/packages/guile.scm > (guile-3.0)[arguments]<#:configure-flags>: Add > "-fexcess-precision=3Dstandard" to CFLAGS. Nitpick: the first two lines can be joined. :-) > (substitute-keyword-arguments (package-arguments guile-2.2) > ((#:configure-flags flags ''()) > - (let ((flags `(cons "--enable-mini-gmp" ,flags))) > + ;; -fexcess-precision=3Dstandard is required when compiling for > + ;; i686-linux, otherwise "numbers.test" will fail. > + (let ((flags `(cons* "CFLAGS=3D-g -O2 -fexcess-precision=3Dstand= ard" > + "--enable-mini-gmp" ,flags))) Yay! Questions: 1. Should we make it conditional on (or (string-prefix? "i686-" %host-type) (string-prefix? "i586-" %host-type)) ? (I wonder why armhf-linux doesn=E2=80=99t have the same problem.) 2. Is there any downside to compiling all of libguile with this flag? 3. Do we have a clear explanation of why =E2=80=98-fexcess-precision=3Dfa= st=E2=80=99 (the default) would lead to failures in =E2=80=98numbers.test=E2=80=99? I looked at the GCC manual (info "(gcc) Optimize Options") and at links you provided earlier on IRC, but I can=E2=80=99t really explain how this wo= uld lead those tests to fail: . I added a =E2=80=98printf=E2=80=99 call in =E2=80=98scm_i_inexact_floor_div= ide=E2=80=99, which is where it all happens: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- static void scm_i_inexact_floor_divide (double x, double y, SCM *qp, SCM *rp) { if (SCM_UNLIKELY (y =3D=3D 0)) scm_num_overflow (s_scm_floor_divide); /* or return a NaN? */ else { double q =3D floor (x / y); double r =3D x - q * y; printf ("%s x=3D%f y=3D%f x/y=3D%f floor(x/y)=3D%f q=3D%f r=3D%f\n", = __func__, x, y, x/y, floor (x/y), q, r); *qp =3D scm_i_from_double (q); *rp =3D scm_i_from_double (r); } } --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- I get this: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- scheme@(guile-user)> (euclidean/ 130. (exact->inexact 10/7)) scm_i_inexact_floor_divide x=3D130.000000 y=3D1.428571 x/y=3D91.000000 floo= r(x/y)=3D90.000000 q=3D90.000000 r=3D1.428571 $1 =3D 90.0 $2 =3D 1.4285714285714257 --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- So it=E2=80=99s really =E2=80=98floor=E2=80=99 that=E2=80=99s messing up so= mehow. Perhaps we have to just accept it, use the flag, and be done with it, but that=E2=80=99s frustrating. Thoughts? Ludo=E2=80=99. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jul 20 12:56:10 2021 Received: (at 49659) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Jul 2021 16:56:10 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35219 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m5t2P-0002zw-UI for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 12:56:10 -0400 Received: from andre.telenet-ops.be ([195.130.132.53]:59904) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m5t2M-0002zm-6n for 49659@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 12:56:09 -0400 Received: from ptr-bvsjgyjmffd7q9timvx.18120a2.ip6.access.telenet.be ([IPv6:2a02:1811:8c09:9d00:aaf1:9810:a0b8:a55d]) by andre.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id XUw42500K0mfAB401Uw4gl; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 18:56:04 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#49659: [PATCH core-updates] gnu: guile: Fix failing tests on i686-linux. From: Maxime Devos To: Ludovic =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?= Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2021 18:55:52 +0200 In-Reply-To: <871r7tks2i.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20210720112712.25905-1-maximedevos@telenet.be> <871r7tks2i.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-FPoAg0/iGbMpsN6KuKTy" User-Agent: Evolution 3.34.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telenet.be; s=r21; t=1626800164; bh=rbHL3mQHMPSX1w8DWb4NOGYHclsXlcAyXvVJAJ4H8eM=; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=hu7ZWMR9+k6zKtkDVTXiRCYT3bBzX622krfz1vmbHjUwnzdUY54rLI2FCyHCr2R2b Ja26xmdEGwG5zl0f22F30xd5nXM0VFswYLrXuSsh9RZuqpcLvM47kZ+Mnisab9zD9C tGJM2t1PQr8sFwZSVYEiV5eNAclnfE8q1ze/FWw2jVWLzMtWwVWRlDQVhSau5NErCS aRYj71dMpfN7TIHh+H/szBUnqE/6Jg7fOP0Cf30b1dREEMCRD8fWXN61lhJFF6hIMT ELZ+iB2q9ixq84EG7IM8CY1yWBkK5BMdgQcI9grrnsvWHbcLIWXpqbSZNileKLXrgq NUu8N0EGFDCUQ== X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 49659 Cc: 49659@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) --=-FPoAg0/iGbMpsN6KuKTy Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ludovic Court=C3=A8s schreef op di 20-07-2021 om 15:55 [+0200]: > Hi! >=20 > Maxime Devos skribis: >=20 > > i586-gnu might have the same issue. >=20 > Please add a =E2=80=9CFixes =E2=80=A6=E2=80=9D line. I didn't find the bug report. > > (substitute-keyword-arguments (package-arguments guile-2.2) > > ((#:configure-flags flags ''()) > > - (let ((flags `(cons "--enable-mini-gmp" ,flags))) > > + ;; -fexcess-precision=3Dstandard is required when compiling fo= r > > + ;; i686-linux, otherwise "numbers.test" will fail. > > + (let ((flags `(cons* "CFLAGS=3D-g -O2 -fexcess-precision=3Dsta= ndard" > > + "--enable-mini-gmp" ,flags))) >=20 > Yay! Questions: >=20 > 1. Should we make it conditional on > (or (string-prefix? "i686-" %host-type) > (string-prefix? "i586-" %host-type)) Rather, (target-x86-32?). target-x86-32? also recognises "i486-linux-gnu" even though that's not a =E2=80=98supported=E2=80=99 cross-target. > ? (I wonder why armhf-linux doesn=E2=80=99t have the same problem.) AFAIK floats & doubles on arm don't have excess precision. Floating-point numbers are either 32-bit or 64-bit, unlike in x86, where the floating-point registers are 80-bit but (sizeof) double=3D=3D8 (64 bits). (I'm ignoring MMX, SSE and the like.) I don't know any architectures beside x86 which have excess precision. "-fexcess-precision=3Dstandard" should be harmless on architectures that don't have excess precision. I'd make it unconditional, but conditional on x86-target? should work for all =E2=80=98supported=E2=80=99 targets in Guix. > 2. Is there any downside to compiling all of libguile with this flag? I searched with "git grep -F double" and "git grep -F float". Floating-point arithmetic doen't seem to be used much outside numbers.c. There's vm-engine.c, but the results of the calculations are written to some (stack?) memory (not a register), so the excess precision would be thrown away anyway, so I don't expect a slow-down. No code appears to be relying on excess precision. > 3. Do we have a clear explanation of why =E2=80=98-fexcess-precision=3D= fast=E2=80=99 > (the default) would lead to failures in =E2=80=98numbers.test=E2=80= =99? The problem I think is that the rounding choices made in scm_i_inexact_floor_divide must be consistent with those made in scm_i_inexact_floor_quotient and=20 scm_i_inexact_floor_remainder (There are tests testing whether the results agree.) "-fexcess-precision=3Dstandard" reduces the degrees of freedom GCC has in choosing when to round, so it is more likely the rounding choices coincide? It's only an untested hypothesis though. FWIW, I think this line: /* in scm_i_inexact_floor_remainder */ return scm_i_from_double (x - y * floor (x / y)); should be (for less fragility in case GCC changes its optimisations and register allocation / spilling) /* in scm_i_inexact_floor_remainder */ return scm_i_from_double (x - y * (double) floor (x / y)); even then, there's no guarantee the rounding choices for x/y are the same in scm_i_inexact_floor_divide, scm_i_inexact_floor_remainder and scm_i_inexact_floor_quotient. > I looked at the GCC manual (info "(gcc) Optimize Options") and at links > you provided earlier on IRC, but I can=E2=80=99t really explain how this = would > lead those tests to fail: ;. > I added a =E2=80=98printf=E2=80=99 call in =E2=80=98scm_i_inexact_floor_d= ivide=E2=80=99, which is where > it all happens: >=20 > --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- > static void > scm_i_inexact_floor_divide (double x, double y, SCM *qp, SCM *rp) > { > if (SCM_UNLIKELY (y =3D=3D 0)) > scm_num_overflow (s_scm_floor_divide); /* or return a NaN? */ > else > { > double q =3D floor (x / y); > double r =3D x - q * y; > printf ("%s x=3D%f y=3D%f x/y=3D%f floor(x/y)=3D%f q=3D%f r=3D%f\n"= , __func__, > x, y, x/y, floor (x/y), q, r); > *qp =3D scm_i_from_double (q); > *rp =3D scm_i_from_double (r); > } > } > --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- >=20 > I get this: >=20 > --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- > scheme@(guile-user)> (euclidean/ 130. (exact->inexact 10/7)) > scm_i_inexact_floor_divide x=3D130.000000 y=3D1.428571 x/y=3D91.000000 fl= oor(x/y)=3D90.000000 q=3D90.000000 r=3D1.428571 > $1 =3D 90.0 > $2 =3D 1.4285714285714257 > --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- >=20 > So it=E2=80=99s really =E2=80=98floor=E2=80=99 that=E2=80=99s messing up = somehow. >=20 I dunno if 'floor' is broken. Let me explain why this output is possible f= or a well-implemented 'floor': I want to note that printf("%f", floor(x/y)) can display 16 different strings: GCC can choose to round 'x' and/or 'y' by moving it from a register to st= ack memory. (doesn't apply here I think because SCM values discard the excess precisi= on) GCC can choose to round the result of x/y (same reasons) GCC can choose to round the result of floor(x/y) (same reasons) Likewise, printf("%f", x/y) can display 8 different strings, and the roundi= ng choices may be different from those made for printf("%f", floor(x/y)). So this inconsistency (x/y=3D91.00... > 90.00 =3D floor(x/y)) doesn't real= ly surprise me. A more concrete scenario: suppose the CPU is configured to ro= und upwards, and 'floor' is a mapping between extended-precision floating-point= numbers. Let 'x' and 'y' be two floating-point numbers, such that: (1) the mathematical value of 'x/y' is slightly less than 91 (2) 'x/y' when calculated in extended precision is slightly less than 91. Denote this approximation as F1. (3) 'x/y' when calculated in double precision is 91 (or slightly larger) (due to the =E2=80=98rounding upwards=E2=80=99 mode, in =E2=80=98round= ing downwards=E2=80=99 it might have been slightly less than 91 as in (2)) Denote this approximation as F2. Then [floor(x/y)=3D] floor(F1)=3Dfloor(90.999...)=3D90.0, and [x/y=3D] F2=3D91.0, thus we seemingly have x/y >=3D 1 + floor(x/y), even though that's mathematically nonsense. Thus, by choosing when to round (in-)appropriately, it is possible (on x86) that printf("x/y=3D%f, floor(x/y)=3D%f",x/y,floor(x/y)) will output "x/y=3D= 91.0 floor(x/y)=3D90.0". (Please tell if I made an error somewhere.) Greetings, Maxime --=-FPoAg0/iGbMpsN6KuKTy Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iI0EABYKADUWIQTB8z7iDFKP233XAR9J4+4iGRcl7gUCYPcAGBccbWF4aW1lZGV2 b3NAdGVsZW5ldC5iZQAKCRBJ4+4iGRcl7hKyAQDJ5XlQC2mQ7FYEHe5CSJkDoEru yljUJ9ZQ9NoE8PgYMAEAyRzRhrXT5MyPD6NUUNrwVAvAy1twRHMZpQ2S8EbVMQQ= =PqZC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-FPoAg0/iGbMpsN6KuKTy-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jul 20 14:23:36 2021 Received: (at 49659) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Jul 2021 18:23:36 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35365 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m5uP2-0005HD-6a for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 14:23:36 -0400 Received: from flashner.co.il ([178.62.234.194]:47444) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m5uP0-0005Gw-FC for 49659@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 14:23:35 -0400 Received: from localhost (unknown [31.210.177.125]) by flashner.co.il (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A63F040337; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 18:23:28 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2021 21:22:33 +0300 From: Efraim Flashner To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Subject: Re: [bug#49659] [PATCH core-updates] gnu: guile: Fix failing tests on i686-linux. Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: Efraim Flashner , Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= , Maxime Devos , 49659@debbugs.gnu.org References: <20210720112712.25905-1-maximedevos@telenet.be> <871r7tks2i.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="QQgO/wyDX7bVdU9W" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <871r7tks2i.fsf@gnu.org> X-PGP-Key-ID: 0x41AAE7DCCA3D8351 X-PGP-Key: https://flashner.co.il/~efraim/efraim_flashner.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351 X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 49659 Cc: 49659@debbugs.gnu.org, Maxime Devos X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) --QQgO/wyDX7bVdU9W Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 03:55:49PM +0200, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: > Hi! >=20 > Maxime Devos skribis: >=20 > > i586-gnu might have the same issue. >=20 > Please add a =E2=80=9CFixes =E2=80=A6=E2=80=9D line. >=20 > > * gnu/packages/guile.scm > > (guile-3.0)[arguments]<#:configure-flags>: Add > > "-fexcess-precision=3Dstandard" to CFLAGS. >=20 > Nitpick: the first two lines can be joined. :-) >=20 > > (substitute-keyword-arguments (package-arguments guile-2.2) > > ((#:configure-flags flags ''()) > > - (let ((flags `(cons "--enable-mini-gmp" ,flags))) > > + ;; -fexcess-precision=3Dstandard is required when compiling for > > + ;; i686-linux, otherwise "numbers.test" will fail. > > + (let ((flags `(cons* "CFLAGS=3D-g -O2 -fexcess-precision=3Dsta= ndard" > > + "--enable-mini-gmp" ,flags))) >=20 > Yay! Questions: >=20 > 1. Should we make it conditional on > (or (string-prefix? "i686-" %host-type) > (string-prefix? "i586-" %host-type)) > ? (I wonder why armhf-linux doesn=E2=80=99t have the same problem.) >=20 > Thoughts? >=20 > Ludo=E2=80=99. >=20 I'd also like to mention that this bug doesn't show up on 32-bit powerpc. --=20 Efraim Flashner =D7=90=D7=A4=D7=A8=D7=99=D7=9D = =D7=A4=D7=9C=D7=A9=D7=A0=D7=A8 GPG key =3D A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351 Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted --QQgO/wyDX7bVdU9W Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEoov0DD5VE3JmLRT3Qarn3Mo9g1EFAmD3FGkACgkQQarn3Mo9 g1G9uA/6AyR1YqeiM2VX+l6HJBNZRtnldPhrRqA9Z8EnWbiJ56UBKuOxXbVE5Bw+ DydR7CeDlbDNmKR8/HBtERuqrCni2+lAq/mnwaLdZGx5cIH1Zl/E60o0wT/trKmI Tchh3QCYBvoDhKF14XVRLHuu4nsZesJ7xLAZpNNpP+24CSl6kYP3flmJsHyzILCN 4j6OtRkJZwo3cbYNolGKmd8BLMuPukWNjDBJHzFUglpE/HUkTK5XQZH0yJUxqQV5 zTEy+Na/vOBltUy9xEljHF5Cz9Z1EAUxwBkXESow7E+LTdh1TaCw/NyhTs+xzVlU qNOlcsjKE5N55j+2E514v/mRn/VxPT2Ol2yznxID0UOpUg12z2t0iPPNvD27/t47 Cqd1brxr6Xf6vl7qnDWIiRePYcg/xjlmLmoX4w6Pu5XU9d8wnoh6HE/k1cbqCph3 1a4tPfecf+CpMZ8P92t+PdM2ULsY3REGRYLF3NbkRitOjzu4fTCbHkBUYduh42s2 tsdsJ09mBnACWnaZw+lhJlAMietw5wc7mMovQM0U2s9vnP0KMHe0URDw/FUKs/kw I5M4sAYzKEOJ0KabruQv1bJMFMsF+2MrUbFr2Sw/L7gUt/WZxOLaTqiBTtWsgPGe OZKbu7i7xkyYoONCjrNLEHPsgRWV4A9gP8jjdx74DmngzHwyaiA= =YOl4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --QQgO/wyDX7bVdU9W-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jul 20 16:52:10 2021 Received: (at 49659) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Jul 2021 20:52:10 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35514 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m5win-0002aL-R1 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 16:52:10 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:44228) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m5wil-0002Zu-8R for 49659@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 16:52:08 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:58508) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m5wif-0003PS-35; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 16:52:01 -0400 Received: from [2a01:e0a:1d:7270:af76:b9b:ca24:c465] (port=45238 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m5wie-0006Um-S0; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 16:52:01 -0400 From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= To: Maxime Devos Subject: Re: bug#49659: [PATCH core-updates] gnu: guile: Fix failing tests on i686-linux. References: <20210720112712.25905-1-maximedevos@telenet.be> <871r7tks2i.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2021 22:51:59 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Maxime Devos's message of "Tue, 20 Jul 2021 18:55:52 +0200") Message-ID: <87fsw8k8sw.fsf_-_@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 49659 Cc: 49659@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Maxime Devos skribis: > Ludovic Court=C3=A8s schreef op di 20-07-2021 om 15:55 [+0200]: [...] >> 1. Should we make it conditional on >> (or (string-prefix? "i686-" %host-type) >> (string-prefix? "i586-" %host-type)) > > Rather, (target-x86-32?). target-x86-32? also recognises "i486-linux-gnu" > even though that's not a =E2=80=98supported=E2=80=99 cross-target. Yes, makes sense. >> ? (I wonder why armhf-linux doesn=E2=80=99t have the same problem.) > > AFAIK floats & doubles on arm don't have excess precision. > > Floating-point numbers are either 32-bit or 64-bit, > unlike in x86, where the floating-point registers are 80-bit > but (sizeof) double=3D=3D8 (64 bits). > > (I'm ignoring MMX, SSE and the like.) > > I don't know any architectures beside x86 which have excess precision. > "-fexcess-precision=3Dstandard" should be harmless on architectures > that don't have excess precision. > > I'd make it unconditional, but conditional on x86-target? should work > for all =E2=80=98supported=E2=80=99 targets in Guix. Alright. I=E2=80=99d still err on the side of making the change only for target-x86-= 32?, because that=E2=80=99s the only case where we know it=E2=80=99s needed. >> 2. Is there any downside to compiling all of libguile with this flag? > > I searched with "git grep -F double" and "git grep -F float". > Floating-point arithmetic doen't seem to be used much outside numbers.c. > > There's vm-engine.c, but the results of the calculations are written > to some (stack?) memory (not a register), so the excess precision > would be thrown away anyway, so I don't expect a slow-down. > > No code appears to be relying on excess precision. OK. >> 3. Do we have a clear explanation of why =E2=80=98-fexcess-precision= =3Dfast=E2=80=99 >> (the default) would lead to failures in =E2=80=98numbers.test=E2=80= =99? > > The problem I think is that the rounding choices made in > scm_i_inexact_floor_divide > must be consistent with those made in > scm_i_inexact_floor_quotient > and=20 > scm_i_inexact_floor_remainder > (There are tests testing whether the results agree.) > > "-fexcess-precision=3Dstandard" reduces the degrees of freedom GCC has > in choosing when to round, so it is more likely the rounding choices > coincide? It's only an untested hypothesis though. > > FWIW, I think this line: > > /* in scm_i_inexact_floor_remainder */ > return scm_i_from_double (x - y * floor (x / y)); > > should be (for less fragility in case GCC changes its optimisations and > register allocation / spilling) > > /* in scm_i_inexact_floor_remainder */ > return scm_i_from_double (x - y * (double) floor (x / y)); > > even then, there's no guarantee the rounding choices for x/y > are the same in scm_i_inexact_floor_divide, scm_i_inexact_floor_remainder > and scm_i_inexact_floor_quotient. Makes sense. Seems to me that this should simply be implemented differently to avoid the inconsistency in the first place (or one could ignore IA32 altogether=E2=80=A6). > I dunno if 'floor' is broken. Let me explain why this output is possible= for a > well-implemented 'floor': > > I want to note that printf("%f", floor(x/y)) > can display 16 different strings: > > GCC can choose to round 'x' and/or 'y' by moving it from a register to = stack memory. > (doesn't apply here I think because SCM values discard the excess preci= sion) > > GCC can choose to round the result of x/y (same reasons) > > GCC can choose to round the result of floor(x/y) (same reasons) > > Likewise, printf("%f", x/y) can display 8 different strings, and the roun= ding > choices may be different from those made for printf("%f", floor(x/y)). > > So this inconsistency (x/y=3D91.00... > 90.00 =3D floor(x/y)) doesn't re= ally > surprise me. A more concrete scenario: suppose the CPU is configured to = round > upwards, and 'floor' is a mapping between extended-precision floating-poi= nt numbers. > > Let 'x' and 'y' be two floating-point numbers, such that: > > (1) the mathematical value of 'x/y' is slightly less than 91 > (2) 'x/y' when calculated in extended precision is slightly less than 91. > Denote this approximation as F1. > (3) 'x/y' when calculated in double precision is 91 (or slightly larger) > (due to the =E2=80=98rounding upwards=E2=80=99 mode, in =E2=80=98rou= nding downwards=E2=80=99 it might > have been slightly less than 91 as in (2)) > Denote this approximation as F2. > > Then [floor(x/y)=3D] floor(F1)=3Dfloor(90.999...)=3D90.0, > and [x/y=3D] F2=3D91.0, thus we seemingly have x/y >=3D 1 + floor(x/y), > even though that's mathematically nonsense. > > Thus, by choosing when to round (in-)appropriately, it is possible (on x8= 6) > that printf("x/y=3D%f, floor(x/y)=3D%f",x/y,floor(x/y)) will output "x/y= =3D91.0 floor(x/y)=3D90.0". I=E2=80=99m no expert but that makes sense to me. Could you send an updated patch? If you think of a way to fix the issue in Guile itself, we can also do that. :-) Thanks for the investigation & explanation! Ludo=E2=80=99. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jul 20 17:34:25 2021 Received: (at 49659) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Jul 2021 21:34:25 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35564 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m5xNh-0003bU-D8 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 17:34:25 -0400 Received: from xavier.telenet-ops.be ([195.130.132.52]:35068) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m5xNf-0003bL-5Z for 49659@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 17:34:24 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([IPv6:2a02:1811:8c09:9d00:aaf1:9810:a0b8:a55d]) by xavier.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id XZaM250020mfAB401ZaMD4; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 23:34:21 +0200 From: Maxime Devos To: 49659@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: [PATCH v2\ core-updates v2] gnu: guile: Fix failing tests on i686-linux. Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2021 23:34:17 +0200 Message-Id: <20210720213417.5285-1-maximedevos@telenet.be> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.32.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telenet.be; s=r21; t=1626816861; bh=RNg0Q6uLoVEtKwplwq83urIntgoiFM4QHh4A8LUCvIA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date; b=o8AhjYhvpfmqWt62LL+8ubZ+4vOloyeHh6ezGfOyg77gnM46ZEpR/QX582gpPAoha k+MVO9Ju/YLEFdS87NTc2YviDnk9cFiCk1r05AdSilLuUcZlnHoxnnLmw/ALQ3es6K Ih+eON48keQLHwAz4FyT/SGEJnGUnZP5yH6QGylHFw9ExkkALbYqcG9Evedric7yOy eEaFdVkoWJS9v2YVBa8+1dRokjgBuo+3e1Bo+BUJap4LNFxi2K3p7NQTtVBJAJQKUe /2xZc3w4y7dfj927xEKogir8xBQtjcgfQrPWvFZDzJguyrrD0xsgVFRS1A4RmYx1J1 wvJNivC0spRnA== X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 49659 Cc: ludo@gnu.org, Maxime Devos X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) i586-gnu might have the same issue. * gnu/packages/guile.scm (guile-3.0)[arguments]<#:configure-flags>: Add "-fexcess-precision=standard" to CFLAGS when (target-x86-32?) is true. Fixes: . --- gnu/packages/guile.scm | 19 ++++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/gnu/packages/guile.scm b/gnu/packages/guile.scm index d78c57e88c..86621e4ca0 100644 --- a/gnu/packages/guile.scm +++ b/gnu/packages/guile.scm @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@ ;;; Copyright © 2018 Eric Bavier ;;; Copyright © 2019 Taylan Kammer ;;; Copyright © 2020, 2021 Efraim Flashner +;;; Copyright © 2021 Maxime Devos ;;; ;;; This file is part of GNU Guix. ;;; @@ -316,11 +317,19 @@ without requiring the source code to be rewritten.") (arguments (substitute-keyword-arguments (package-arguments guile-2.2) ((#:configure-flags flags ''()) - (let ((flags `(cons "--enable-mini-gmp" ,flags))) - ;; XXX: JIT-enabled Guile crashes in obscure ways on GNU/Hurd. - (if (hurd-target?) - `(cons "--disable-jit" ,flags) - flags))) + ;; XXX: JIT-enabled Guile crashes in obscure ways on GNU/Hurd. + `(cons* ,@(if (hurd-target?) + '("--disable-jit") + '()) + ;; -fexcess-precision=standard is required when compiling for + ;; i686-linux, otherwise "numbers.test" will fail + ;; (see and + ;; ). + ,@(if (target-x86-32?) + '("CFLAGS=-g -O2 -fexcess-precision=standard") + '()) + "--enable-mini-gmp" + ,flags)) ((#:phases phases) `(modify-phases ,phases (add-before 'check 'disable-stack-overflow-test -- 2.32.0 From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jul 21 09:49:25 2021 Received: (at 49659-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Jul 2021 13:49:25 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36540 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m6CbF-000110-Ah for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 09:49:25 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:39612) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m6CbD-00010m-Lj for 49659-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 09:49:24 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:48072) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m6Cb8-0004nG-BF; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 09:49:18 -0400 Received: from [2a01:e0a:1d:7270:af76:b9b:ca24:c465] (port=45258 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m6Cb7-0007hL-IY; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 09:49:17 -0400 From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= To: Maxime Devos Subject: Re: bug#49659: [PATCH core-updates] gnu: guile: Fix failing tests on i686-linux. References: <20210720112712.25905-1-maximedevos@telenet.be> <20210720213417.5285-1-maximedevos@telenet.be> Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2021 15:49:15 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20210720213417.5285-1-maximedevos@telenet.be> (Maxime Devos's message of "Tue, 20 Jul 2021 23:34:17 +0200") Message-ID: <87v953hj50.fsf_-_@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 49659-done Cc: 49659-done@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hi, Maxime Devos skribis: > i586-gnu might have the same issue. > > * gnu/packages/guile.scm (guile-3.0)[arguments]<#:configure-flags>: > Add "-fexcess-precision=3Dstandard" to CFLAGS when > (target-x86-32?) is true. > > Fixes: . I tweaked the commit log and pushed as fccc0275091af10a46471c68df525d19f446af9e. Looks like we should be able to move forward with this branch now, thank you! Ludo=E2=80=99. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jul 21 10:50:41 2021 Received: (at 49659) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Jul 2021 14:50:41 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38234 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m6DYW-0005Ky-RP for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 10:50:41 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:53542) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m6DYU-0005Kl-Sn for 49659@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 10:50:39 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:50424) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m6DYO-0004OJ-53; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 10:50:32 -0400 Received: from lfbn-lyo-1-1316-195.w86-207.abo.wanadoo.fr ([86.207.13.195]:51118 helo=meije) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m6DYK-0002mR-Ex; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 10:50:29 -0400 From: Mathieu Othacehe To: 49659@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: bug#49659: [PATCH core-updates] gnu: guile: Fix failing tests on i686-linux. References: <20210720112712.25905-1-maximedevos@telenet.be> <20210720213417.5285-1-maximedevos@telenet.be> <87v953hj50.fsf_-_@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2021 16:50:25 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87v953hj50.fsf_-_@gnu.org> ("Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= =?utf-8?Q?=22's?= message of "Wed, 21 Jul 2021 15:49:15 +0200") Message-ID: <875yx3pvpq.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 49659 Cc: ludo@gnu.org, maximedevos@telenet.be X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hey, > I tweaked the commit log and pushed as > fccc0275091af10a46471c68df525d19f446af9e. > > Looks like we should be able to move forward with this branch now, > thank you! Thanks for taking care of that Maxime & Ludo :). Should we create a core-updates-frozen branch that Cuirass would build for the "all" subset? I can take care of that if so. Mathieu From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jul 23 05:07:55 2021 Received: (at 49659) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Jul 2021 09:07:55 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42291 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m6r9u-0006Yc-VG for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 05:07:55 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:46740) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m6r9t-0006YP-26 for 49659@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 05:07:53 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:52818) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m6r9n-0007tg-Lv; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 05:07:47 -0400 Received: from [2001:660:6102:320:e120:2c8f:8909:cdfe] (port=42902 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m6r9n-00015Y-A0; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 05:07:47 -0400 From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= To: Mathieu Othacehe Subject: Re: bug#49659: [PATCH core-updates] gnu: guile: Fix failing tests on i686-linux. References: <20210720112712.25905-1-maximedevos@telenet.be> <20210720213417.5285-1-maximedevos@telenet.be> <87v953hj50.fsf_-_@gnu.org> <875yx3pvpq.fsf@gnu.org> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 5 Thermidor an 229 de la =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0x090B11993D9AEBB5 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CE4 6455 8A84 FDC6 9DB4 0CFB 090B 1199 3D9A EBB5 X-OS: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2021 11:07:45 +0200 In-Reply-To: <875yx3pvpq.fsf@gnu.org> (Mathieu Othacehe's message of "Wed, 21 Jul 2021 16:50:25 +0200") Message-ID: <8735s5cs9q.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 49659 Cc: maximedevos@telenet.be, 49659@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hi, Mathieu Othacehe skribis: >> I tweaked the commit log and pushed as >> fccc0275091af10a46471c68df525d19f446af9e. >> >> Looks like we should be able to move forward with this branch now, >> thank you! > > Thanks for taking care of that Maxime & Ludo :). Should we create a > core-updates-frozen branch that Cuirass would build for the "all" > subset? I can take care of that if so. There are =E2=80=9Ctwo last things=E2=80=9D to check IMO: 1. Make sure powerpc64le-linux is in a good state. Can we get it built? (We discussed adding a worker on the OSUOSL machine but I think we eventually dropped the ball.) 2. will trigger rebuilds. I was waiting before applying it so we get several people looking into it; Maxime had valid criticism, I=E2=80=99m interested in hearing from others too. :-) Once we=E2=80=99re OK on these two fronts, let=E2=80=99s branch =E2=80=98co= re-updates-frozen=E2=80=99 and unleash our package-fixing superpowers! Ludo=E2=80=99. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jul 23 05:27:44 2021 Received: (at 49659) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Jul 2021 09:27:44 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42306 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m6rT6-00071P-Bd for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 05:27:44 -0400 Received: from laurent.telenet-ops.be ([195.130.137.89]:40270) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m6rT3-00071G-Kl for 49659@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 05:27:42 -0400 Received: from ptr-bvsjgyjmffd7q9timvx.18120a2.ip6.access.telenet.be ([IPv6:2a02:1811:8c09:9d00:aaf1:9810:a0b8:a55d]) by laurent.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id YZTe250040mfAB401ZTeQY; Fri, 23 Jul 2021 11:27:40 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#49659: [PATCH core-updates] gnu: guile: Fix failing tests on i686-linux. From: Maxime Devos To: Ludovic =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?= , Mathieu Othacehe Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2021 11:27:30 +0200 In-Reply-To: <8735s5cs9q.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20210720112712.25905-1-maximedevos@telenet.be> <20210720213417.5285-1-maximedevos@telenet.be> <87v953hj50.fsf_-_@gnu.org> <875yx3pvpq.fsf@gnu.org> <8735s5cs9q.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-8pimMj974B1AaGj9wN0J" User-Agent: Evolution 3.34.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telenet.be; s=r21; t=1627032460; bh=kbuIzejqyDePF7bndykETz/jWNOVBZ36vJfNlDpe0fw=; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=vTnAQaYXoDP7l1Q5sD6rKkgB+OONj0QYjC0Majx/twpZ7eBaFzaNJrvUHX3tmy43K 5g6Ury51guFvuIA7ckT5m53tIUYNk97NJHyPwTtg8xX0Z1KLQYZ7DSlK9dYXKTgzk4 ElQWO7/M1CqgaX5HUb2eGNWj+5nloXcV2Iyz0YycDNTGrP6AHcf1TxVA4TXJreqNkM eDvh3QFgQab7H2oREBRFzO+V9KfO4kjef5nD/tW519fzOL4B9T4LObsoZ14NwHsQWg vlxIvkICT+uWOgIpdjFucVweC1wBEeJKvCBWQmo5j2lAhE45+8hm11UCzf3fa+13ie fxwD9uCwcjioQ== X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 49659 Cc: 49659@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) --=-8pimMj974B1AaGj9wN0J Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ludovic Court=C3=A8s schreef op vr 23-07-2021 om 11:07 [+0200]: > Hi, >=20 > Mathieu Othacehe skribis: >=20 > > > I tweaked the commit log and pushed as > > > fccc0275091af10a46471c68df525d19f446af9e. > > >=20 > > > Looks like we should be able to move forward with this branch now, > > > thank you! > >=20 > > Thanks for taking care of that Maxime & Ludo :). Should we create a > > core-updates-frozen branch that Cuirass would build for the "all" > > subset? I can take care of that if so. >=20 > There are =E2=80=9Ctwo last things=E2=80=9D to check IMO: [...] For --target=3Dx86_64-w64-mingw32, the patch is required, to fix a build failure of x86_64-w64-mingw32-binutils. Greetings, Maxime. --=-8pimMj974B1AaGj9wN0J Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iI0EABYKADUWIQTB8z7iDFKP233XAR9J4+4iGRcl7gUCYPqLgxccbWF4aW1lZGV2 b3NAdGVsZW5ldC5iZQAKCRBJ4+4iGRcl7sraAQCYZ/p1ZrPZkloNdJIT4MsSGT1b 8YEI2HrlUmK+VXelfgD+J1skRhFF5SYxjGNwz76o2uBivlptDwqqOnBnwMN3/w4= =1CyS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-8pimMj974B1AaGj9wN0J-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Jul 25 19:52:57 2021 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Jul 2021 23:52:57 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49593 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m7nvV-0004ty-Az for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 25 Jul 2021 19:52:57 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:40580) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1m7nvT-0004tq-AN for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 25 Jul 2021 19:52:56 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40186) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m7nvS-0001Bn-KQ for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Jul 2021 19:52:55 -0400 Received: from mx.kolabnow.com ([95.128.36.40]:25910) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m7nvL-0006ej-G0; Sun, 25 Jul 2021 19:52:53 -0400 Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by ext-mx-out003.mykolab.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36C0140DC5; Mon, 26 Jul 2021 01:52:42 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kolabnow.com; h= content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :references:in-reply-to:message-id:date:date:subject:subject :from:from:received:received:received; s=dkim20160331; t= 1627257161; x=1629071562; bh=AZN8PDHRXX4vkeKFcqeITp+q705cWqk47AI dh2zG5zw=; b=iB6Oc5LqP8GGkdTVbHvW/DhIbgGsz5UO66RYCAGOWCoCezgEIGh Dx2gOjUkwXaMAT6ke3XKBcPsYlP3oNWVxm9ID+/vMifqtctsVSBmu48yoduST0YR o9xI0J1m46snoIXCF3JiDPjMSU1kYwmhWANLowE7MGEOCBxI7WF8aHFAgCfd/pZ6 VS3QHEuYanVHgF4em1YGztcrMaxEO6kS4OMXUyrHCityB3CkNob8w8FiHk/Yq5WM RDKCNtYJIN/10M8JPQvlti4ZTC7dQX0n+cQQHT3oMzjy85+5APqBsjItfOj5I3zn qI910AeqXsuswLXNsDprAceERMbpXU5uc6gmcsozS79Ic4Nf3exph577T2sgdH+e wrIq+BzQ0pg7Di/1iEWOMIPNoXRsbN/Tjfc53Zq9J9F14NRuSSUrYjbWjcjRCq3N MDTlHODO0bDzCDd9eLMANKck+6oLtNUocm2jdrpBROEyEqOkKrQCNPepzHeUUFHh C3Fblc7317/XIhnNyvIJjSVbVICvFMHrL/omKwv8hoi2TR9AXoUoY+6++FP90o72 8vzvzDJsMNuRbXKjj4buFLzIXGaUtXzrR8qC4uAgVTB8JOh1aF3XnlyXs8XcoYjw 6ZnPdLKIPI8iCUNVMWYUOWADOmj/2/ViIWyi9i/XM5ZBkqv9/q09NNos= X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mykolab.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mx.kolabnow.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ext-mx-out003.mykolab.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OyFVKVyA8qsM; Mon, 26 Jul 2021 01:52:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from int-mx001.mykolab.com (unknown [10.9.13.1]) by ext-mx-out003.mykolab.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 618FD40DA3; Mon, 26 Jul 2021 01:52:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ext-subm001.mykolab.com (unknown [10.9.6.1]) by int-mx001.mykolab.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBEB93365; Mon, 26 Jul 2021 01:52:38 +0200 (CEST) From: Thiago Jung Bauermann To: Mathieu Othacehe , guix-patches@gnu.org Subject: Re: [bug#49659] [PATCH core-updates] gnu: guile: Fix failing tests on i686-linux. Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2021 20:52:28 -0300 Message-ID: <5701551.jmBiHemN7o@popigai> In-Reply-To: <8735s5cs9q.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20210720112712.25905-1-maximedevos@telenet.be> <875yx3pvpq.fsf@gnu.org> <8735s5cs9q.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=95.128.36.40; envelope-from=bauermann@kolabnow.com; helo=mx.kolabnow.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit Cc: 49659@debbugs.gnu.org, Ludovic =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?= , maximedevos@telenet.be X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.4 (--) Hello, Em sexta-feira, 23 de julho de 2021, =C3=A0s 06:07:45 -03, Ludovic Court=C3= =A8s=20 escreveu: > Hi, >=20 > Mathieu Othacehe skribis: > >> I tweaked the commit log and pushed as > >> fccc0275091af10a46471c68df525d19f446af9e. > >>=20 > >> Looks like we should be able to move forward with this branch now, > >> thank you! > >=20 > > Thanks for taking care of that Maxime & Ludo :). Should we create a > > core-updates-frozen branch that Cuirass would build for the "all" > > subset? I can take care of that if so. >=20 > There are =E2=80=9Ctwo last things=E2=80=9D to check IMO: >=20 > 1. Make sure powerpc64le-linux is in a good state. Can we get it > built? (We discussed adding a worker on the OSUOSL machine but I > think we eventually dropped the ball.) >=20 > 2. will trigger rebuilds. I was > waiting before applying it so we get several people looking into > it; Maxime had valid criticism, I=E2=80=99m interested in hearing fr= om > others too. :-) >=20 > Once we=E2=80=99re OK on these two fronts, let=E2=80=99s branch =E2=80=98= core-updates-frozen=E2=80=99 > and unleash our package-fixing superpowers! Perhaps libdrm and Mesa could be updated before the freeze as suggested by= =20 John Kehayias=C2=B9? Or could/should that be done on a branch apart from core-updates? Not sure= =20 if that=E2=80=99s what Ricardo=E2=80=99s suggestion about creating a new br= anch means. =2D-=20 Thanks, Thiago =C2=B9 https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2021-07/msg00105.html From unknown Sun Jun 22 07:50:53 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2021 11:24:06 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator