From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2021 10:22:26 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] Analysis of build results for 2021-03-03 In-Reply-To: <6cb4a8d7-bee8-5712-2cac-1259d01e288e@benettiengineering.com> References: <20210304081519.C821B4B530@smtp4.osuosl.org> <20210304224926.45aa4056@windsurf.home> <6cb4a8d7-bee8-5712-2cac-1259d01e288e@benettiengineering.com> Message-ID: <20210305102226.49bc0b0d@windsurf.home> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello Giulio, On Fri, 5 Mar 2021 08:56:32 +0100 Giulio Benetti wrote: > Yes, I've filed it time ago here: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93847 > > Then maintainer wanted me to provide all pre-preprocessed files and all > build flags. There the issue was showing using Codesourcery only, but > here we have a Buildroot toolchain, so better chance to dig. Indeed! > Anyway I can add patches to add the _BUG_ and use the -O0 workaround. > What about that? Sure, sounds good. > >> nios2 | belle-sip-4.4.8 | NOK | http://autobuild.buildroot.net/results/71f26fd81db8e9b19b3f18f3f3cefd9c768f094f | > > > > /tmp/ccDtjRfo.s: Assembler messages: > > /tmp/ccDtjRfo.s:210798: Error: branch offset out of range > > > > Another wonderful nios2 toolchain issue. Giulio, what do you think ? > > This is new to me, I've checked on Gcc Bugzilla and it doesn't seem to > be there. So I can file it up and look for a workaround, maybe the usual > -O0. With these errors, I'm never sure if it's a gcc issue (that emits bogus assembly) or a binutils issue. But most likely a gcc issue. > >> nios2 | libgeos-3.9.0 | NOK | http://autobuild.buildroot.net/results/a05fdf1958f93a206c5c66c7f636b6650683626d | ORPH > > > > Some more nios2 toolchain issue. > > This is very similar to one of Microblaze gcc bugs. So I could be able > to workaround it with the same -O0. OK. Maybe we should default to -O2 for those funky architectures? Indeed, our default is -Os, but this is perhaps less widely used/tested than -O2 ? Or are the bugs in question also appearing at -O2 ? > > Should we get rid of nios2 support entirely ? > > Here it seems we get to the same point of Microblaze, if there is no > hurry I can provide patches to save Nios the same way I've done for > Microblaze. My concern is that those gcc issues for nios2/microblaze never seem to be fixed. That there are gcc issues that we need to workaround, it's fine I guess, but that they stay forever is more annoying. > >> arm | toolchain-external-linaro-a... | NOK | http://autobuild.buildroot.net/results/d9b9a4b7c3660bd730a19ab09e44f24bc29e3f40 | ORPH > >> arm | toolchain-external-linaro-a... | NOK | http://autobuild.buildroot.net/results/13f9a551f5ac911e7daa2a382b0683d81486cffa | ORPH > > > > toolchain is gone ? > > Here it's Micronova firewall that blocks it, I've just written to my IT. OK, thanks! > >> powerpc | unknown | NOK | http://autobuild.buildroot.net/results/159d2c07060c235080711d1d0da0b2eae995d4bf | > > > > This is a top-level parallel build issue... but since we don't have the > > full log, we don't have the error. > > > > Should we perhaps keep the full log, compressed, for builds done in > > parallel ? > > I see it's on my Autobuilder, what can I do to provide suck full log? Do > you mean the entire Buildroot log? If yes I can try to reproduce it and > save it on a file and post it in some way. Now that the build is finished, the build log is gone. My proposal here was to adjust the autobuild-run script to upload to autobuild.buildroot.org the full build log (compressed) when the build is a top-level parallel build. > >> or1k | zeromq-4.3.4 | NOK | http://autobuild.buildroot.net/results/ed105d321c0bde99c293ab7328d57c3764db6f27 | > >> or1k | zeromq-4.3.4 | NOK | http://autobuild.buildroot.net/results/ce351e0e97c2cacc17d4718d39941548c7558559 | > > > > /home/giuliobenetti/autobuild/run/instance-1/output-1/host/opt/ext-toolchain/bin/../lib/gcc/or1k-buildroot-linux-uclibc/9.3.0/../../../../or1k-buildroot-linux-uclibc/bin/ld: BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.33.1 assertion fail elf32-or1k.c:2329 > > collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status > > > > Giulio, is this a known or1k issue ? > > Yes, for this I've sent a patchset time ago: > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/buildroot/list/?series=161548 > > So basically zeromq should be disabled like protobuf. But need to check it. > > You've also answered me here: > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/buildroot/patch/20200228175814.128730-1-giulio.benetti at benettiengineering.com/ > > Here it seems the same situation as Nios and Microblaze. > > For this I can provide patches too if not in hurry. Maybe we should be pragmatic here and just take your patches as-is. Thanks for all the feedback! Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, co-owner and CEO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com