Linux Archive

Linux Archive (http://www.linux-archive.org/)
-   Fedora Development (http://www.linux-archive.org/fedora-development/)
-   -   PPC/PPC64 builders not working? (http://www.linux-archive.org/fedora-development/108315-ppc-ppc64-builders-not-working.html)

Rex Dieter 06-17-2008 01:37 PM

PPC/PPC64 builders not working?
 
Mamoru Tasaka wrote:

> Lorenzo Villani wrote, at 06/17/2008 08:12 PM +9:00:
>> It seems that the PPC/PPC64 builders are stucked with our chainbuild:
>> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=664653
>>
>> As far as I can tell, it has been at least 6-7 hours now that those
>> builders are processing kdepimlibs build.
>>
>> Regards
>
> For at least 5 days ppc/ppc64 builds are stacked when
> "dot" command (in graphviz) (or doxygen?) is called, see:
>
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-June/msg00719.html
>
> Also:
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=659366
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=663323
>
> ppc/ppc64 specific bug in graphviz (or doxygen?)

any bugs filed yet?

-- Rex


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

David Woodhouse 06-17-2008 03:00 PM

PPC/PPC64 builders not working?
 
On Tue, 2008-06-17 at 08:37 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Mamoru Tasaka wrote:
>
> > Lorenzo Villani wrote, at 06/17/2008 08:12 PM +9:00:
> >> It seems that the PPC/PPC64 builders are stucked with our chainbuild:
> >> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=664653
> >>
> >> As far as I can tell, it has been at least 6-7 hours now that those
> >> builders are processing kdepimlibs build.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >
> > For at least 5 days ppc/ppc64 builds are stacked when
> > "dot" command (in graphviz) (or doxygen?) is called, see:
> >
> > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-June/msg00719.html
> >
> > Also:
> > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=659366
> > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=663323
> >
> > ppc/ppc64 specific bug in graphviz (or doxygen?)
>
> any bugs filed yet?

Just taking a moment to add 'strace -f' to the doxygen invocation in the
libburn specfile shows interesting behaviour...

[pid 1268] execve("/usr/bin/dot", ["dot"..., "libburn_8h__incl.dot"..., "-Tpng"..., "-o"..., "libburn_8h__incl.png"...], [/* 31 vars */]
....
[pid 1268] --- SIGILL (Illegal instruction) @ 0 (0) ---
[pid 1268] rt_sigreturn(0x4) = 0
[pid 1268] --- SIGILL (Illegal instruction) @ 0 (0) ---
[pid 1268] rt_sigreturn(0x4) = 0
[pid 1268] --- SIGILL (Illegal instruction) @ 0 (0) ---

Did anyone even bother to file that bug yet?

If not, how do you expect it to get fixed?

I'm used to having to explain the basic mechanisms of "first you tell us
about the bug, and only _then_ can we fix it" to the Great Unwashed on
#fedora, but I kind of expect better from you lot :)

--
dwmw2

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Jesse Keating 06-17-2008 03:11 PM

PPC/PPC64 builders not working?
 
On Tue, 2008-06-17 at 16:00 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
>
> Just taking a moment to add 'strace -f' to the doxygen invocation in the
> libburn specfile shows interesting behaviour...
>
> [pid 1268] execve("/usr/bin/dot", ["dot"..., "libburn_8h__incl.dot"..., "-Tpng"..., "-o"..., "libburn_8h__incl.png"...], [/* 31 vars */]
> ....
> [pid 1268] --- SIGILL (Illegal instruction) @ 0 (0) ---
> [pid 1268] rt_sigreturn(0x4) = 0
> [pid 1268] --- SIGILL (Illegal instruction) @ 0 (0) ---
> [pid 1268] rt_sigreturn(0x4) = 0
> [pid 1268] --- SIGILL (Illegal instruction) @ 0 (0) ---
>
> Did anyone even bother to file that bug yet?
>
> If not, how do you expect it to get fixed?
>
> I'm used to having to explain the basic mechanisms of "first you tell us
> about the bug, and only _then_ can we fix it" to the Great Unwashed on
> #fedora, but I kind of expect better from you lot :)

To be fair, it likely requires a ppc host to be able to investigate the
problem to this level, and that's just not something everybody has
sitting on their desk.

--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedomē is a feature!
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Kevin Kofler 06-17-2008 03:19 PM

PPC/PPC64 builders not working?
 
Jesse Keating <jkeating <at> redhat.com> writes:
> To be fair, it likely requires a ppc host to be able to investigate the
> problem to this level, and that's just not something everybody has
> sitting on their desk.

Right, and that's why PPC (and PPC64 even more so) should be a secondary arch.
When the most mainstream "computer" with a PPC CPU is the PS3, you know you
have a problem. ;-) PPC as a primary arch made sense when Macs used it, not
anymore.

(Hmmm, who decides what arches are primary? The Board? FESCo? Somebody else?)

Kevin Kofler

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

David Woodhouse 06-17-2008 03:27 PM

PPC/PPC64 builders not working?
 
On Tue, 2008-06-17 at 11:11 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-06-17 at 16:00 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> >
> > Just taking a moment to add 'strace -f' to the doxygen invocation in the
> > libburn specfile shows interesting behaviour...
> >
> > [pid 1268] execve("/usr/bin/dot", ["dot"..., "libburn_8h__incl.dot"..., "-Tpng"..., "-o"..., "libburn_8h__incl.png"...], [/* 31 vars */]
> > ....
> > [pid 1268] --- SIGILL (Illegal instruction) @ 0 (0) ---
> > [pid 1268] rt_sigreturn(0x4) = 0
> > [pid 1268] --- SIGILL (Illegal instruction) @ 0 (0) ---
> > [pid 1268] rt_sigreturn(0x4) = 0
> > [pid 1268] --- SIGILL (Illegal instruction) @ 0 (0) ---
> >
> > Did anyone even bother to file that bug yet?
> >
> > If not, how do you expect it to get fixed?
> >
> > I'm used to having to explain the basic mechanisms of "first you tell us
> > about the bug, and only _then_ can we fix it" to the Great Unwashed on
> > #fedora, but I kind of expect better from you lot :)
>
> To be fair, it likely requires a ppc host to be able to investigate the
> problem to this level, and that's just not something everybody has
> sitting on their desk.

I can't reproduce it on any of my machines -- the above is from adding
'strace -f' to the specfile, and trying a scratch build.

I suspect it's either 64KiB pages, or something trying to use Altivec
when it shouldn't. Probably the latter, given the nature of the problem.

Will try to reproduce on the POWER5, although I think one of the routers
between me and it is dead so I can't reach it at the moment.

--
dwmw2

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Than Ngo 06-17-2008 03:30 PM

PPC/PPC64 builders not working?
 
Am Dienstag, 17. Juni 2008 17:00:11 schrieb David Woodhouse:
> On Tue, 2008-06-17 at 08:37 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> > Mamoru Tasaka wrote:
> > > Lorenzo Villani wrote, at 06/17/2008 08:12 PM +9:00:
> > >> It seems that the PPC/PPC64 builders are stucked with our chainbuild:
> > >> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=664653
> > >>
> > >> As far as I can tell, it has been at least 6-7 hours now that those
> > >> builders are processing kdepimlibs build.
> > >>
> > >> Regards
> > >
> > > For at least 5 days ppc/ppc64 builds are stacked when
> > > "dot" command (in graphviz) (or doxygen?) is called, see:
> > >
> > > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-June/msg00719.ht
> > >ml
> > >
> > > Also:
> > > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=659366
> > > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=663323
> > >
> > > ppc/ppc64 specific bug in graphviz (or doxygen?)
> >
> > any bugs filed yet?
>
> Just taking a moment to add 'strace -f' to the doxygen invocation in the
> libburn specfile shows interesting behaviour...
>
> [pid 1268] execve("/usr/bin/dot", ["dot"..., "libburn_8h__incl.dot"...,
> "-Tpng"..., "-o"..., "libburn_8h__incl.png"...], [/* 31 vars */] ....
> [pid 1268] --- SIGILL (Illegal instruction) @ 0 (0) ---
> [pid 1268] rt_sigreturn(0x4) = 0
> [pid 1268] --- SIGILL (Illegal instruction) @ 0 (0) ---
> [pid 1268] rt_sigreturn(0x4) = 0
> [pid 1268] --- SIGILL (Illegal instruction) @ 0 (0) ---
>
> Did anyone even bother to file that bug yet?
>
> If not, how do you expect it to get fixed?
>
> I'm used to having to explain the basic mechanisms of "first you tell us
> about the bug, and only _then_ can we fix it" to the Great Unwashed on
> #fedora, but I kind of expect better from you lot :)

the backtrace shows the problem in dot which is part of graphviz.

Than

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Jesse Keating 06-17-2008 03:30 PM

PPC/PPC64 builders not working?
 
On Tue, 2008-06-17 at 16:27 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> I can't reproduce it on any of my machines -- the above is from adding
> 'strace -f' to the specfile, and trying a scratch build.

This trick should likely be documented somewhere in our wiki to aid
people in trying to debug build failures.

--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedomē is a feature!
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Jesse Keating 06-17-2008 03:31 PM

PPC/PPC64 builders not working?
 
On Tue, 2008-06-17 at 15:19 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> Right, and that's why PPC (and PPC64 even more so) should be a secondary arch.
> When the most mainstream "computer" with a PPC CPU is the PS3, you know you
> have a problem. ;-) PPC as a primary arch made sense when Macs used it, not
> anymore.
>
> (Hmmm, who decides what arches are primary? The Board? FESCo? Somebody else?)

PPC is scheduled to become a Secondary arch when we actually have a
successful Secondary Arch system. We don't have that right now, so we
can't move PPC into that slot. ia64 is getting very close to doing
their first release, with a somewhat by hand Secondary Arch effort,
paving the way (along with sparc) for a more automated system that would
finally allow us to move PPC over.

--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedomē is a feature!
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

David Woodhouse 06-17-2008 03:32 PM

PPC/PPC64 builders not working?
 
On Tue, 2008-06-17 at 17:30 +0200, Than Ngo wrote:
> the backtrace shows the problem in dot which is part of graphviz.

You have a backtrace? Can you show me, please?

On what machine did you obtain that?

--
dwmw2

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Brian Pepple 06-17-2008 03:37 PM

PPC/PPC64 builders not working?
 
On Tue, 2008-06-17 at 15:19 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Jesse Keating <jkeating <at> redhat.com> writes:
> > To be fair, it likely requires a ppc host to be able to investigate the
> > problem to this level, and that's just not something everybody has
> > sitting on their desk.
>
> Right, and that's why PPC (and PPC64 even more so) should be a secondary arch.
> When the most mainstream "computer" with a PPC CPU is the PS3, you know you
> have a problem. ;-) PPC as a primary arch made sense when Macs used it, not
> anymore.
>
> (Hmmm, who decides what arches are primary? The Board? FESCo? Somebody else?)

FESCo made the decision a while back that once another arch was up and
running as a secondary arch, PPC would be moved from a primary to a
secondary arch.

Later,
/B
--
Brian Pepple <bpepple@fedoraproject.org>

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BrianPepple
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 810CC15E
BD5E 6F9E 8688 E668 8F5B CBDE 326A E936 810C C15E
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:27 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.