Bug#860805: Could we set bug #860805 against beignet-opencl-icd to stretch-is-blocker?
On 2017-05-03 00:31, Rebecca N. Palmer wrote: > Someone please upload beignet (as currently in Alioth); I'll file an > unblock request. Upload is on its way. You can probably wait a few days with the unblock request, the release-team will probably pick up the upload fixing an RC bug on their own. Andreas
Bug#860805: [Pkg-opencl-devel] Bug#860805: Bug#860805: Could we set bug #860805 against beignet-opencl-icd to stretch-is-blocker?
Control: tags -1 pending The above looks like success - thanks. Someone please upload beignet (as currently in Alioth); I'll file an unblock request.
Processed: Re: [Pkg-opencl-devel] Bug#860805: Bug#860805: Could we set bug #860805 against beignet-opencl-icd to stretch-is-blocker?
Processing control commands: > tags -1 pending Bug #860805 [beignet-opencl-icd] beignet-opencl-icd: OpenCL fails with: drm_intel_gem_bo_context_exec() failed: Device or resource busy Added tag(s) pending. -- 860805: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=860805 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#860805: [Pkg-opencl-devel] Bug#860805: Could we set bug #860805 against beignet-opencl-icd to stretch-is-blocker?
Hi, On Tue, May 02, 2017 at 07:40:43AM +0100, Rebecca N. Palmer wrote: > Has anyone tried the clFFT test I requested above? I've now done a test on my system (Thinkpad T440s, i5-4300U): 1. Without the patch (stderr): drm_intel_gem_bo_context_exec() failed: Device or resource busy Beignet: "Exec event 0x55e6d5920fd0 error, type is 4592, error staus is -5" (err: 0)after clGetPlatformIDs (err: 0) Platform found: Intel Gen OCL Driver (err: 0)after clGetDeviceIDs (err: 0)Device found on the above platform: Intel(R) HD Graphics Haswell Ultrabook GT2 Mobile (err: 0) after clCreateContext (err: 0)after clCreateCommandQueue (err: 0)after clfftInitSetupData (err: 0)after clfftSetup Performing fft on an one dimensional array of size N = 8192 (err: 0)after clCreateBuffer (err: 0)after clfftCreateDefaultPlan (err: 0)after clfftSetPlanPrecision (err: 0)after clfftSetLayout (err: 0)after clfftSetResultLocation (err: 0)after clfftBakePlan (err: 0)after clEnqueueWriteBuffer drm_intel_gem_bo_context_exec() failed: Device or resource busy Beignet: "Exec event 0x55e6d61cf540 error, type is 4592, error staus is -5" clEnqueueNDRangeKernel failed second... -14 params: 1 1024 128 0 ERROR executing the kernel -5 (err: -14)after clfftEnqueueTransform (err: -14)after clfftEnqueueTransform = CL_EXEC_STATUS_ERROR_FOR_EVENTS_IN_WAIT_LIST (err: 0)after clFinish (err: 0)after clEnqueueReadBuffer Time took 1: 0.000406 ERROR: found same numbers !!! ... FFT was not executed !!! 2. With the patch (stderr): (err: 0)after clGetPlatformIDs (err: 0) Platform found: Intel Gen OCL Driver (err: 0)after clGetDeviceIDs (err: 0)Device found on the above platform: Intel(R) HD Graphics Haswell Ultrabook GT2 Mobile (err: 0) after clCreateContext (err: 0)after clCreateCommandQueue (err: 0)after clfftInitSetupData (err: 0)after clfftSetup Performing fft on an one dimensional array of size N = 8192 (err: 0)after clCreateBuffer (err: 0)after clfftCreateDefaultPlan (err: 0)after clfftSetPlanPrecision (err: 0)after clfftSetLayout (err: 0)after clfftSetResultLocation (err: 0)after clfftBakePlan (err: 0)after clEnqueueWriteBuffer (err: 0)after clfftEnqueueTransform (err: 0)after clFinish (err: 0)after clEnqueueReadBuffer Time took 1: 0.000887 stdout contains values which could be the in- and output of an FFT in the 2. case. Cheers, Michael
Bug#860805: [Pkg-opencl-devel] Bug#860805: Could we set bug #860805 against beignet-opencl-icd to stretch-is-blocker?
Has anyone tried the clFFT test I requested above? Nothing further from upstream.
Bug#860805: Could we set bug #860805 against beignet-opencl-icd to stretch-is-blocker?
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 10:50:46 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi Niels, > > On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 07:21:00AM +, Niels Thykier wrote: > > @Andreas: Assuming worst case, what are the options for dropping beignet > > support in your packages? (I appreciate that they are probably not the > > best, but ...) > > As I wrote in my other mail I wonder if the testing removal script is > even correct since the dependencies are > > $ apt-cache show libhmsbeagle1v5 | grep ^Depends > Depends: libc6 (>= 2.14), libgcc1 (>= 1:3.0), libstdc++6 (>= 5.2), > ocl-icd-libopencl1 | libopencl1, ocl-icd-libopencl1 (>= 1.0) | > libopencl-1.1-1, beignet-opencl-icd | mesa-opencl-icd | opencl-icd > > so providing alternatives that could fullfill the Dependencies. > It's very much correct. If beignet-opencl-icd doesn't ship, then it shouldn't be the first alternative in some other package's Depends. Cheers, Julien
Bug#860805: [Pkg-opencl-devel] Bug#860805: Could we set bug #860805 against beignet-opencl-icd to stretch-is-blocker?
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 10:03:31AM +, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 09:35:53AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: > > Please excuse my hardware ignorance but how can I tell whether my hardware > > has Haswell? Any one-liner to read out the relevant part from the system > > information? > > compare /proc/cpuinfo with $ grep '^model name' /proc/cpuinfo | head -n1 model name : Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-4200U CPU @ 1.60GHz > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haswell_%28microarchitecture%29#List_of_Haswell_processors ... 4200U is listed so I guess I can do the testing, right? Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
Bug#860805: [Pkg-opencl-devel] Bug#860805: Could we set bug #860805 against beignet-opencl-icd to stretch-is-blocker?
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 09:35:53AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: > Please excuse my hardware ignorance but how can I tell whether my hardware > has Haswell? Any one-liner to read out the relevant part from the system > information? compare /proc/cpuinfo with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haswell_%28microarchitecture%29#List_of_Haswell_processors probably hwinfo from that package will also detected it, dunno. -- cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#860805: Could we set bug #860805 against beignet-opencl-icd to stretch-is-blocker?
Hi Niels, On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 07:21:00AM +, Niels Thykier wrote: > @Andreas: Assuming worst case, what are the options for dropping beignet > support in your packages? (I appreciate that they are probably not the > best, but ...) As I wrote in my other mail I wonder if the testing removal script is even correct since the dependencies are $ apt-cache show libhmsbeagle1v5 | grep ^Depends Depends: libc6 (>= 2.14), libgcc1 (>= 1:3.0), libstdc++6 (>= 5.2), ocl-icd-libopencl1 | libopencl1, ocl-icd-libopencl1 (>= 1.0) | libopencl-1.1-1, beignet-opencl-icd | mesa-opencl-icd | opencl-icd so providing alternatives that could fullfill the Dependencies. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
Bug#860805: [Pkg-opencl-devel] Bug#860805: Could we set bug #860805 against beignet-opencl-icd to stretch-is-blocker?
Hi Rebecca, On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 08:20:34AM +0100, Rebecca N. Palmer wrote: > - We now have a test case for the error remaining after the patch, but it > doesn't fail on my system: any of you with Haswell hardware and a real (not > chrooted) sid/stretch, please apply the patch then try > https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100639 Please excuse my hardware ignorance but how can I tell whether my hardware has Haswell? Any one-liner to read out the relevant part from the system information? > >this morning 16 "marked for autoremoval from testing" mails hit my > >mailbox for partly quite important Debian Med packages. I'm sure other > >packages will be affected as well so this package is somehow cruxial. > > I'm not sure why, given that this package is one of several OpenCL > implementations. I guess is based on libhmsbeagle1v5. It is Depends: beignet-opencl-icd|mesa-opencl-icd|opencl-icd but I've got the "marked for autoremoval from testing" despite the fact that there are alternatives. May be it is caused by a failure in the testing migration script? Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
Bug#860805: [Pkg-opencl-devel] Bug#860805: Could we set bug #860805 against beignet-opencl-icd to stretch-is-blocker?
Upstream status update: - The patch is probably better than disabling softpin, but neither is perfect; in particular, there is now a report of *silently wrong results* (it's now yet clear with which), which means a partial fix *may* be worse than nothing. - We now have a test case for the error remaining after the patch, but it doesn't fail on my system: any of you with Haswell hardware and a real (not chrooted) sid/stretch, please apply the patch then try https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100639 this morning 16 "marked for autoremoval from testing" mails hit my mailbox for partly quite important Debian Med packages. I'm sure other packages will be affected as well so this package is somehow cruxial. I'm not sure why, given that this package is one of several OpenCL implementations.
Bug#860805: Could we set bug #860805 against beignet-opencl-icd to stretch-is-blocker?
Andreas Tille: > Hi release team, > > this morning 16 "marked for autoremoval from testing" mails hit my > mailbox for partly quite important Debian Med packages. I'm sure other > packages will be affected as well so this package is somehow cruxial. > > I wonder whether you might consider this bug stretch-is-blocker to make > sure we will not loose a larger set of packages. > > Kind regards > > Andreas. > Hi Andreas, Sorry to hear that you are affected by an auto-removal. With that and the removal date being in June, we should plenty of time to see where this bug is going and possibly device a fix for it. There is some recent progress on the upstream bug with a patch, which might bring us closer to a fix (@Rebecca: Kudos for the timely response to the bug when it was filed). Also, please keep in mind that regular updates to the bug will reset the timer. Even a simple """I tried this patch from upstream, it didn't work because of X. Notify upstream of the issue""" will reset the automatic timer. @Andreas: Assuming worst case, what are the options for dropping beignet support in your packages? (I appreciate that they are probably not the best, but ...) Thanks, ~Niels
Bug#860805: Could we set bug #860805 against beignet-opencl-icd to stretch-is-blocker?
Hi release team, this morning 16 "marked for autoremoval from testing" mails hit my mailbox for partly quite important Debian Med packages. I'm sure other packages will be affected as well so this package is somehow cruxial. I wonder whether you might consider this bug stretch-is-blocker to make sure we will not loose a larger set of packages. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
