pkgsrc-Users archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
rust - volunteers sought...
Hi,
as you may know, I have been trying to keep the rust pkgsrc
package up-to-date.
As part of that effort, I do testing of the resulting compilers,
and for "full success" I require that rust self-host on the
target CPU architecture, and for amd64 and i386 I should be able
to build and run firefox using the new compiler.
However, lately I've been seeing failures in my testing which is
a bit worrying. I've mostly assumed that "if there is something
CPU-specific about an issue, it must show up and be tested for
and fixed for one of the other platforms", but lately it appears
that is not so much the case.
Briefly, the test results for the recent versions of rust on
NetBSD can be summarized as follows:
1.75.0 1.76.0 1.77.1 1.78.0
aarch64 x x f f
aarch64eb f f f f
amd64 x x x x
armv6 x x o ?
armv7 x x f f
i386 x x x x
mipsel f f f f
ppc x x x x
riscv64 x x x x
sparc64/10.0 x x x f
sparc64/9.0 x x x x
x = tests ok
f = failed one or more tests
o = ongoing, unknown
We can perhaps disregard aarch64eb (where I just recently was
able to spin up a qemu instance and do some actual testing), and
mipsel (which is o32 mips32, which has never been able to
self-host due to address space limitations, and rust-bin for this
platform appears to have broken with a bump of the embedded LLVM,
ref. https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/118978).
However, the rest is a bit worrying, here's a walkthrough:
armv7: This is reported upstream in
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/123549
My more detailed test log shows:
f NetBSD 9 earmv7hf-el / rust-bin dua-cli (cargo crashes early)
f NetBSD 9 earmv7hf-el / llvm-16 native-build
f NetBSD 9 earmv7hf-el / internal-llvm native-build (segv null pointer deref)
The first one is trying to use the cross-built rust compiler via
the rust177-bin package to build dua-cli.
For second and the third, I end up with
rustc exited with signal: 11 (SIGSEGV) (core dumped)
after respectively nearly 40 or 60 hours wallclock time using a
4-CPU instance with MAKE_JOBS?=3 in a qemu instance (on an Intel
host).
armv6 most probably doesn't fare much better. To complete the
last successful native build, I had to expand the MAXDSIZ kernel
parameter to a value slightly above the default, i.e. run a
custom kernel to complete the build. This one appears to run up
against
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116758
...and now that I check, the wip/rust177 build had gotten stuck
and had gone un-noticed for a while, now re-started.
aarch64: this is perhaps more worrying, since this one "is
supposed to work", is "a current platform" and isn't so resource-
constrained as armv6 or armv7. This one reports a stack
overflow in our case:
thread 'rustc' has overflowed its stack
fatal runtime error: stack overflow
after around 33 hours wallclock time building on my virtual 4-CPU
arm64 qemu instance (with MAKE_JOBS?=3), building with the
bundled LLVM, during the "stage 2" build.
This is reported upstream as
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/123551
but so far it appears nobody else is seeing a similar failure.
riscv64: this one completes (knock on wood!), also built using a
qemu instance, but when I run the dua-cli application via "dua i"
I get "dua: text relocations" on the console (visible after I
exit the curses-like program).
sparc64: this one is a little weird. Upstream report
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/117231
Mostly rust builds OK on my NetBSD 9.2 host, using the C++
compiler there (which is 7.5.0), including rust 1.78.0. However,
on NetBSD 10.0, it looked like the bundled GCC (10.5.0)
mis-compiles parts of LLVM(?) in 1.77.x, and there I've had to
bump the required GCC to 12, but now that isn't working in 1.78.0
anymore -- I get
rustc exited with signal: 4 (SIGILL) (core dumped)
error: could not compile `proc-macro-test-impl` (lib)
after some 141 hours wallclock time.
Earlier I've had trouble with the combination of "NetBSD/sparc64
10.0" and "external LLVM", but I'm re-trying that at the moment.
We'll see. My sparc64 hosts are not fast...
So... It would be really nice to get some assistance to figure
out some of these failures. Perhaps aarch64 as a first priority,
then the 32-bit arm platforms as second.
Best regards,
- Håvard
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index |
Old Index