GNU bug report logs - #56680
go-1.16.15 build fails in check phase on powerpc64le

Previous Next

To reply to this bug, email your comments to 56680 AT debbugs.gnu.org.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Marcel van der Boom <marcel <at> van-der-boom.nl>
To: bug-guix <at> gnu.org
Subject: go-1.16.15 build fails in check phase on powerpc64le
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2022 15:05:09 +0200

During the check phase of building go-1.16.15 (as dependency of 
ungoogled-chromium) a failure occurs:


https://dpaste.org/ib5CZ :

--- FAIL: TestTrivialExecutable (3.43s)
   shared_test.go:484: file too large: got 202752, want <= 100000
--- FAIL: TestTrivialExecutablePIE (0.61s)
   shared_test.go:484: file too large: got 202824, want <= 100000


Full build log: https://dpaste.org/iWfL0

Message #8 received at 56680 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Marcel van der Boom <marcel <at> van-der-boom.nl>
To: 56680 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: go-1.16.15 build fails in check phase on powerpc64le
Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2022 18:24:47 +0200

I see that the full build log expired on the paste site.

Is any additional info needed here, other than the excerpt of the 
log?

I suspect the check error is a safety precaution to ensure 
executables are of reasonable size, but reasonable is perhaps a 
bit different on the POWER9 platform?

Message #11 received at 56680 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Efraim Flashner <efraim <at> flashner.co.il>
To: Marcel van der Boom <marcel <at> van-der-boom.nl>
Cc: 56680 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#56680: go-1.16.15 build fails in check phase on powerpc64le
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2022 20:48:02 +0300

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Thu, Aug 04, 2022 at 06:24:47PM +0200, Marcel van der Boom wrote:
> 
> I see that the full build log expired on the paste site.
> 
> Is any additional info needed here, other than the excerpt of the log?
> 
> I suspect the check error is a safety precaution to ensure executables are
> of reasonable size, but reasonable is perhaps a bit different on the POWER9
> platform?

I'm currently working on bootstrapping go-1.17.11 directly from gccgo,
so we'd be able to skip 1.16 entirely. Currently it works on
x86_64-linux but not on riscv64-linux. If you want to test something
like that on powerpc64le that'd be great.

-- 
Efraim Flashner   <efraim <at> flashner.co.il>   אפרים פלשנר
GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D  14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351
Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #14 received at 56680 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Marcel van der Boom <marcel <at> van-der-boom.nl>
To: Efraim Flashner <efraim <at> flashner.co.il>
Cc: 56680 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#56680: go-1.16.15 build fails in check phase on powerpc64le
Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2022 23:02:53 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

[Efraim Flashner]:
> I'm currently working on bootstrapping go-1.17.11 directly from 
> gccgo,
> so we'd be able to skip 1.16 entirely. Currently it works on
> x86_64-linux but not on riscv64-linux. If you want to test 
> something
> like that on powerpc64le that'd be great.

Sure, can you point me in the right direction and get me started 
on what would be useful for you?

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #17 received at 56680 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Efraim Flashner <efraim <at> flashner.co.il>
To: Marcel van der Boom <marcel <at> van-der-boom.nl>
Cc: 56680 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#56680: go-1.16.15 build fails in check phase on powerpc64le
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2022 00:34:30 +0300

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Thu, Aug 04, 2022 at 11:02:53PM +0200, Marcel van der Boom wrote:
> 
> [Efraim Flashner]:
> > I'm currently working on bootstrapping go-1.17.11 directly from gccgo,
> > so we'd be able to skip 1.16 entirely. Currently it works on
> > x86_64-linux but not on riscv64-linux. If you want to test something
> > like that on powerpc64le that'd be great.
> 
> Sure, can you point me in the right direction and get me started on what
> would be useful for you?

Looking at the package definitions for go it looks like the inputs and
native-inputs need to be cleaned up some, but for our purposes I think
just removing the native-inputs field completely from 1.17 should try to
make go-1.17 build with gccgo. Then try to build go <at> 1.17.

-- 
Efraim Flashner   <efraim <at> flashner.co.il>   אפרים פלשנר
GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D  14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351
Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #20 received at 56680 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Marcel van der Boom <marcel <at> van-der-boom.nl>
To: Efraim Flashner <efraim <at> flashner.co.il>
Cc: 56680 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#56680: go-1.16.15 build fails in check phase on powerpc64le
Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2022 15:19:56 +0200

[Efraim Flashner]:
> [...]
> just removing the native-inputs field completely from 1.17 
> should try to
> make go-1.17 build with gccgo. Then try to build go <at> 1.17.

That does indeed start a gccgo build and fails after a while with 
this:
( https://dpaste.org/3UwS2 has more details)


starting phase `build'
Building Go cmd/dist using 
/gnu/store/imii98jzv6jhgyk4k6mkagyhksjwn0rr-gccgo-10.3.0. (go1.14.6 
gccgo (GCC) 10.3.0 linux/ppc64le)
Building Go toolchain1 using 
/gnu/store/imii98jzv6jhgyk4k6mkagyhksjwn0rr-gccgo-10.3.0.
Building Go bootstrap cmd/go (go_bootstrap) using Go toolchain1.

/tmp/guix-build-go-1.17.11.drv-0/source/src/internal/abi/abi.go:37:7: 
internal compiler error: '(*RegArgs).Dump': nil register for 
value: v13 = SelectN <mem> [0] v12

Message #23 received at 56680 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Marcel van der Boom <marcel <at> van-der-boom.nl>
To: 56680 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: go-1.16.15 build fails in check phase on powerpc64le
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2023 16:30:42 +0100

Looking at

https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/commit/?id=024a8b39957203f3a3cb93c87746c35635b81e57

it might make sense to do the same for the 'powerpc64le' target as 
well?

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.