[Bug 1933988] Review Request: nativejit - Library for high-performance just-in-time compilation of expressions involving C data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933988 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2021-03-19 20:11:39 --- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-6bb23e4603 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1933988] Review Request: nativejit - Library for high-performance just-in-time compilation of expressions involving C data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933988 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-6bb23e4603 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-6bb23e4603 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-6bb23e4603 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1933988] Review Request: nativejit - Library for high-performance just-in-time compilation of expressions involving C data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933988 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-6bb23e4603 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-6bb23e4603 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1933988] Review Request: nativejit - Library for high-performance just-in-time compilation of expressions involving C data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933988 --- Comment #21 from Tomas Hrcka --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nativejit -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1933988] Review Request: nativejit - Library for high-performance just-in-time compilation of expressions involving C data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933988 --- Comment #20 from c...@musicinmybrain.net --- The idea of a -filesystem package is that, when all you need is the directory to store files in “in case they are needed,” you can depend on the -filesystem package instead of pulling in another system (in this case CMake) that might not be otherwise required. The first part of https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_file_and_directory_ownership and the subsection https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_the_directory_is_owned_by_a_package_which_is_not_required_for_your_package_to_function both talk about these -filesystem packages. For example, suppose I have a package that requires nativejit-devel but does not use CMake. If nativejit-devel Requires cmake-filesystem, that is just one trivial extra package added to my buildroot. If nativejit-devel Requires cmake, that is 17 unnecessary packages added to my buildroot, totaling 24 M downloaded and 107 M installed, including guile22 and python3. This is not catastrophic, but you can see why people try to avoid it. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1933988] Review Request: nativejit - Library for high-performance just-in-time compilation of expressions involving C data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933988
--- Comment #19 from Antonio T. sagitter ---
(In reply to code from comment #17)
> I’m not sure that requiring all of CMake from -devel to own the directory is
> the right approach. Is the goal to support EPEL7, where this package is not
> available? If so, it seems like it would be better to conditionalize it:
>
> %if 0%{?epel} == 7
> Requires: cmake%{?_isa}
> %else
> Requires: cmake-filesystem
> %endif
>
> Actually, what I would do is
>
> %if 0%{?epel} != 7
> Requires: cmake-filesystem
> %endif
>
> and then in %files devel, co-own the directory on EPEL7:
>
> %if 0%{?epel} == 7
> %dir %{_libdir}/cmake/
> %endif
>
>
EPEL7 support is not expected for now.
However, in Fedora, 'cmake' requires 'cmake-filesystem' (that wouldn't make
sense without cmake):
$ repoquery --requires cmake | grep filesystem
Last metadata expiration check: 0:03:36 ago on lun 8 mar 2021, 19:09:01.
cmake-filesystem(x86-32) = 3.18.3-1.fc33
cmake-filesystem(x86-64) = 3.18.3-1.fc33
cmake-filesystem(x86-64) = 3.18.4-2.fc33
>
> That said, I’ll go ahead and approve the package as-is. Thanks for working
> through all of these details.
Thank you.
>
>
>
> If you have the chance to review one of mine, would you mind doing
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1936138? I need it for
> unbundling from grpc. It’s a header-only C library that shouldn’t take long
> to review. Thanks!
Assigned.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1933988] Review Request: nativejit - Library for high-performance just-in-time compilation of expressions involving C data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933988
c...@musicinmybrain.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #17 from c...@musicinmybrain.net ---
I’m not sure that requiring all of CMake from -devel to own the directory is
the right approach. Is the goal to support EPEL7, where this package is not
available? If so, it seems like it would be better to conditionalize it:
%if 0%{?epel} == 7
Requires: cmake%{?_isa}
%else
Requires: cmake-filesystem
%endif
Actually, what I would do is
%if 0%{?epel} != 7
Requires: cmake-filesystem
%endif
and then in %files devel, co-own the directory on EPEL7:
%if 0%{?epel} == 7
%dir %{_libdir}/cmake/
%endif
That said, I’ll go ahead and approve the package as-is. Thanks for working
through all of these details.
If you have the chance to review one of mine, would you mind doing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1936138? I need it for unbundling
from grpc. It’s a header-only C library that shouldn’t take long to review.
Thanks!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1933988] Review Request: nativejit - Library for high-performance just-in-time compilation of expressions involving C data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933988 Antonio T. sagitter changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(trpost@rocketmail | |.com) | --- Comment #16 from Antonio T. sagitter --- (In reply to code from comment #15) > Package Review > == > > Legend: > [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated > > = Issues = > > - The -devel subpackage needs to Require: cmake-filesystem for > /usr/lib64/cmake (Overwrited) Spec URL: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/nativejit/nativejit.spec SRPM URL: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/nativejit/nativejit-0.1-1.fc33.src.rpm > > = Other notes = > > - ExclusiveArch is present and properly justified. Once the package is > approved > you must file a bug in Bugzilla for each unsupported primary architecture, > and blocking the relevant tracker bug. See > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ > #_architecture_build_failures > for details, and https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1897661 for an > example. > Okay. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1933988] Review Request: nativejit - Library for high-performance just-in-time compilation of expressions involving C data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933988
c...@musicinmybrain.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(trpost@rocketmail
||.com)
--- Comment #15 from c...@musicinmybrain.net ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
= Issues =
- The -devel subpackage needs to Require: cmake-filesystem for /usr/lib64/cmake
= Other notes =
- ExclusiveArch is present and properly justified. Once the package is approved
you must file a bug in Bugzilla for each unsupported primary architecture,
and blocking the relevant tracker bug. See
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_architecture_build_failures
for details, and https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1897661 for an
example.
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated", "Expat License". 19 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/reviewer/1933988-nativejit/20210306/1933988-nativejit/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib64/cmake
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[-]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
ExclusiveArch present and properly justified. Once the package is approved
you must file a bug in Bugzilla for each unsupported primary architecture,
and blocking the relevant tracker bug. See
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_architecture_build_failures
for details, and https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1897661 for
an example.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is
[Bug 1933988] Review Request: nativejit - Library for high-performance just-in-time compilation of expressions involving C data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933988 Antonio T. sagitter changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(trpost@rocketmail | |.com) | --- Comment #14 from Antonio T. sagitter --- Spec URL: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/nativejit/nativejit.spec SRPM URL: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/nativejit/nativejit-0.1-1.fc33.src.rpm Scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=63154175 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1933988] Review Request: nativejit - Library for high-performance just-in-time compilation of expressions involving C data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933988 c...@musicinmybrain.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(trpost@rocketmail ||.com) --- Comment #13 from c...@musicinmybrain.net --- The undefined symbols in /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0 are all defined in /usr/lib64/libCodeGen.so.0. So the problem is that the NativeJIT library fails to link the CodeGen library. Adding target_link_libraries(NativeJIT PUBLIC CodeGen) in src/NativeJIT/CMakeLists.txt seems to fix it. It may be that the dependency could be PRIVATE rather than PUBLIC; I do not understand the interaction of these CMake linking options with C++ well enough to be sure. - By the way, -DCMAKE_VERBOSE_MAKEFILE:BOOL=TRUE is (harmlessly) redundant with -DCMAKE_VERBOSE_MAKEFILE:BOOL=ON in the expansion of %cmake. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1933988] Review Request: nativejit - Library for high-performance just-in-time compilation of expressions involving C data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933988
Antonio T. sagitter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(trpost@rocketmail |
|.com) |
--- Comment #12 from Antonio T. sagitter ---
(In reply to code from comment #10)
> Okay, I looked into it further, and it seems COPASI already implements
> option “1.” Look at
> https://github.com/copasi/COPASI/blob/
> 0dddbe0d84e4248270ff65d06ea2b3997cc4f3b9/copasi/math/CJitCompiler.cpp to see
> how all JIT is disabled when a runtime CPU feature test shows SSE4 is not
> available. So from a policy perspective, everything is fine.
>
> You do need a quick feature test in the spec file to avoid running the tests
> on build hosts without SSE4.2 (like mine!). Your %check could look like this:
>
> if grep -E '\bsse4_2\b' /proc/cpuinfo >/dev/null
> then
> %ctest -- -VV
> else
> echo 'No SSE4.2 support on build host; skipping tests' 1>&2
> fi
>
> Or, if it’s more to your liking, use the other package you have under review:
>
> BuildRequires: google-cpu_features
> BuildRequires: jq
>
> if list_cpu_features -j | jq -e '.flags | index("sse4_2")' >/dev/null
> then
> %ctest -- -VV
> else
> echo 'No SSE4.2 support on build host; skipping tests' 1>&2
> fi
>
> Personally, I would favor also adding a comment near the ExcludeArch
> mentioning the SSE4.2 requirement and linking
> https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/1044, and perhaps mentioning the
> SSE4.2 requirement in the package description as well.
>
> -
>
> Based on
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/
> #_listing_shared_library_files, you should write the shared library globs as
>
> %{_libdir}/libCodeGen.so.0
> %{_libdir}/libNativeJIT.so.0
>
> instead of
>
> %{_libdir}/libCodeGen.so.*
> %{_libdir}/libNativeJIT.so.*
>
> -
>
> I’m not a big fan of claiming something as vague and generic as
> /usr/include/Temporary, but I’m not sure there’s a reasonable way to avoid
> it.
>
> -
>
> I’m going to go ahead and claim this for review. Could you post an updated
> version that skips the tests when necessary and adjusts the shared library
> globs, and I’ll review that? Thanks.
Spec URL: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/nativejit/nativejit.spec
SRPM URL:
https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/nativejit/nativejit-0.0-2.fc33.src.rpm
Scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=63078250
(In reply to code from comment #11)
>
> And this:
>
> nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0
> NativeJIT::rip
> nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0
> NativeJIT::RegisterBase::c_names
> nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0
> NativeJIT::rbp
> nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0
> NativeJIT::RegisterBase::c_sizes
> nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0
> NativeJIT::rsp
> nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0
> NativeJIT::FunctionBuffer::EndFunctionBodyGeneration(NativeJIT::
> FunctionSpecification const&)
> nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0
> NativeJIT::X64CodeGenerator::CodePrinter::PrintBytes(unsigned int, unsigned
> int)
> nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0
> NativeJIT::CodeBuffer::AllocateLabel()
> nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0
> NativeJIT::X64CodeGenerator::CodePrinter::CodePrinter(NativeJIT::
> X64CodeGenerator&)
> nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0
> NativeJIT::X64CodeGenerator::IsDiagnosticsStreamAvailable() const
> nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0
> NativeJIT::FunctionBuffer::BeginFunctionBodyGeneration()
> nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0
> NativeJIT::LogThrowImpl(char const*, char const*, unsigned int, char const*,
> char const*, ...)
> nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0
> NativeJIT::IosMiniStateRestorer::~IosMiniStateRestorer()
> nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0
> NativeJIT::CodeBuffer::Emit32(unsigned int)
> nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0
> NativeJIT::IosMiniStateRestorer::IosMiniStateRestorer(std::basic_ios std::char_traits >&)
> nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0
> NativeJIT::X64CodeGenerator::GetDiagnosticsStream() const
> nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0
> NativeJIT::Label::Label()
> nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0
[Bug 1933988] Review Request: nativejit - Library for high-performance just-in-time compilation of expressions involving C data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933988 --- Comment #11 from c...@musicinmybrain.net --- Ok, a couple of other preliminary things from rpmlint: nativejit.x86_64: E: summary-too-long C Library for high-performance just-in-time compilation of expressions involving C data structures That’s easy to fix. And this: nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0 NativeJIT::rip nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0 NativeJIT::RegisterBase::c_names nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0 NativeJIT::rbp nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0 NativeJIT::RegisterBase::c_sizes nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0 NativeJIT::rsp nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0 NativeJIT::FunctionBuffer::EndFunctionBodyGeneration(NativeJIT::FunctionSpecification const&) nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0 NativeJIT::X64CodeGenerator::CodePrinter::PrintBytes(unsigned int, unsigned int) nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0 NativeJIT::CodeBuffer::AllocateLabel() nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0 NativeJIT::X64CodeGenerator::CodePrinter::CodePrinter(NativeJIT::X64CodeGenerator&) nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0 NativeJIT::X64CodeGenerator::IsDiagnosticsStreamAvailable() const nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0 NativeJIT::FunctionBuffer::BeginFunctionBodyGeneration() nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0 NativeJIT::LogThrowImpl(char const*, char const*, unsigned int, char const*, char const*, ...) nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0 NativeJIT::IosMiniStateRestorer::~IosMiniStateRestorer() nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0 NativeJIT::CodeBuffer::Emit32(unsigned int) nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0 NativeJIT::IosMiniStateRestorer::IosMiniStateRestorer(std::basic_ios >&) nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0 NativeJIT::X64CodeGenerator::GetDiagnosticsStream() const nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0 NativeJIT::Label::Label() nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0 NativeJIT::X64CodeGenerator::OpCodeName(NativeJIT::OpCode) nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0 NativeJIT::CodeBuffer::Emit8(unsigned char) nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0 NativeJIT::FunctionBuffer::GetEntryPoint() const nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0 NativeJIT::X64CodeGenerator::CodePrinter::GetPointerName(unsigned int) nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0 NativeJIT::CodeBuffer::CurrentPosition() const nativejit.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libNativeJIT.so.0 NativeJIT::FunctionSpecification::FunctionSpecification(Allocators::IAllocator&, int, unsigned int, unsigned int, unsigned int, NativeJIT::FunctionSpecification::BaseRegisterType, std::basic_ostream >*) I haven’t had time to try to understand why that is happening. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1933988] Review Request: nativejit - Library for high-performance just-in-time compilation of expressions involving C data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933988
c...@musicinmybrain.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|c...@musicinmybrain.net
Flags||fedora-review?
||needinfo?(trpost@rocketmail
||.com)
--- Comment #10 from c...@musicinmybrain.net ---
Okay, I looked into it further, and it seems COPASI already implements option
“1.” Look at
https://github.com/copasi/COPASI/blob/0dddbe0d84e4248270ff65d06ea2b3997cc4f3b9/copasi/math/CJitCompiler.cpp
to see how all JIT is disabled when a runtime CPU feature test shows SSE4 is
not available. So from a policy perspective, everything is fine.
You do need a quick feature test in the spec file to avoid running the tests on
build hosts without SSE4.2 (like mine!). Your %check could look like this:
if grep -E '\bsse4_2\b' /proc/cpuinfo >/dev/null
then
%ctest -- -VV
else
echo 'No SSE4.2 support on build host; skipping tests' 1>&2
fi
Or, if it’s more to your liking, use the other package you have under review:
BuildRequires: google-cpu_features
BuildRequires: jq
if list_cpu_features -j | jq -e '.flags | index("sse4_2")' >/dev/null
then
%ctest -- -VV
else
echo 'No SSE4.2 support on build host; skipping tests' 1>&2
fi
Personally, I would favor also adding a comment near the ExcludeArch mentioning
the SSE4.2 requirement and linking
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/1044, and perhaps mentioning the
SSE4.2 requirement in the package description as well.
-
Based on
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_listing_shared_library_files,
you should write the shared library globs as
%{_libdir}/libCodeGen.so.0
%{_libdir}/libNativeJIT.so.0
instead of
%{_libdir}/libCodeGen.so.*
%{_libdir}/libNativeJIT.so.*
-
I’m not a big fan of claiming something as vague and generic as
/usr/include/Temporary, but I’m not sure there’s a reasonable way to avoid it.
-
I’m going to go ahead and claim this for review. Could you post an updated
version that skips the tests when necessary and adjusts the shared library
globs, and I’ll review that? Thanks.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1933988] Review Request: nativejit - Library for high-performance just-in-time compilation of expressions involving C data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933988 Antonio T. sagitter changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(trpost@rocketmail | |.com) | --- Comment #9 from Antonio T. sagitter --- Thank you Benjamin for your in-depth analysis but i have absolutely not idea of what's the best choice. I compile this software as-is provided by upstream, observations like yours are beyond my knowledge. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1933988] Review Request: nativejit - Library for high-performance just-in-time compilation of expressions involving C data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933988 --- Comment #8 from c...@musicinmybrain.net --- I guess a fourth allowable option is for the COPASI application to cleanly exit when SSE4.2 is not supported. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1933988] Review Request: nativejit - Library for high-performance just-in-time compilation of expressions involving C data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933988
c...@musicinmybrain.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(trpost@rocketmail
||.com)
--- Comment #7 from c...@musicinmybrain.net ---
The library compiles with -mSSE4.2 so that the implementations of the two
overloads of NativeJIT::BitOp::GetNonZeroBitCount can use POPCNT/LZCNT. You are
already ExclusiveArch: x86_64, but the base x86_64 architecture does not
include these instructions. I recently raised this issue (admittedly, based on
a misunderstanding of the library in question at the time) and got FESCo to
record a policy: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/1044.
So you seem to have a few options:
1. Proceed with packaging this library as-is, with SSE4.2 instructions
possibly
sprinkled throughout due to the -mSSE4.2 option. This is allowable since
it
is a library. In the COPASI application, you will have to provide runtime
feature detection and a fallback that completely avoids calling any
functions
from this library, since any of them could include SSE4 instructions.
2. Patch this library to add runtime CPU detection and fallback
implementations,
compiling the optimized versions of these two routines with
__attribute__((__target__("sse4.2"))) or in a separate translation unit
with
-mSSE4.2. Remove -mSSE4.2 from the overall compiler flags. It may be
difficult
to avoid paying a possibly-significant performance penalty for added
indirection
at the granularity of a tiny inlinable function.
3. Give up the speed advantage of POPCNT/LZCNT: remove -mSSE4.2 from the
overall
compiler flags, and replace the two overloads of
NativeJIT::BitOp::GetNonZeroBitCount unconditionally with a generic
algorithm
like
https://graphics.stanford.edu/~seander/bithacks.html#CountBitsSetParallel.
This has the advantage of simplicity, and of not adding indirection. The
performance penalty will probably vary from trivial to substantial
depending on
how heavily the JIT’ed routines use these operations.
What do you think?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1933988] Review Request: nativejit - Library for high-performance just-in-time compilation of expressions involving C data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933988 --- Comment #6 from Antonio T. sagitter --- > The package fails to build in mock for me: I fixed the source archive. Spec URL: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/nativejit/nativejit.spec SRPM URL: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/nativejit/nativejit-0.0-1.fc33.src.rpm > It seems reasonable as long as you plan to continue maintaining it and as > long as you do not diverge from the original upstream in ways that would make > the fork unsuitable for dependent packages other than COPASI. I think a > comment in the spec file describing these plans would be very helpful. I agree, added comments to the SPEC file. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1933988] Review Request: nativejit - Library for high-performance just-in-time compilation of expressions involving C data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933988 --- Comment #5 from c...@musicinmybrain.net --- Created attachment 1760239 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1760239=edit CMakeError.log Fails to build with mock -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1933988] Review Request: nativejit - Library for high-performance just-in-time compilation of expressions involving C data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933988 --- Comment #4 from c...@musicinmybrain.net --- Created attachment 1760237 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1760237=edit CMakeOutput.log Fails to build with mock -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1933988] Review Request: nativejit - Library for high-performance just-in-time compilation of expressions involving C data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933988 c...@musicinmybrain.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||c...@musicinmybrain.net --- Comment #3 from c...@musicinmybrain.net --- It seems like upstream hasn’t really had either commits nor bug reports since late 2018, so I could understand the potential need for a “maintained fork.” Is that what’s happening here? It seems reasonable as long as you plan to continue maintaining it and as long as you do not diverge from the original upstream in ways that would make the fork unsuitable for dependent packages other than COPASI. I think a comment in the spec file describing these plans would be very helpful. The package fails to build in mock for me: + /usr/bin/cmake -S . -B x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE:STRING=-DNDEBUG -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE:STRING=-DNDEBUG -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE:STRING=-DNDEBUG -DCMAKE_VERBOSE_MAKEFILE:BOOL=ON -DCMAKE_INSTALL_DO_STRIP:BOOL=OFF -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX:PATH=/usr -DINCLUDE_INSTALL_DIR:PATH=/usr/include -DLIB_INSTALL_DIR:PATH=/usr/lib64 -DSYSCONF_INSTALL_DIR:PATH=/etc -DSHARE_INSTALL_PREFIX:PATH=/usr/share -DLIB_SUFFIX=64 -DBUILD_SHARED_LIBS:BOOL=ON -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE:STRING=Release '-DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE:STRING=-O2 -flto=auto -ffat-lto-objects -fexceptions -g -grecord-gcc-switches -pipe -Wall -Werror=format-security -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -Wp,-D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-cc1 -fstack-protector-strong -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-annobin-cc1 -m64 -mtune=generic -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection -fcf-protection -DNDEBUG' '-DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE:STRING=-O2 -flto=auto -ffat-lto-objects -fexceptions -g -grecord-gcc-switches -pipe -Wall -Werror=format-security -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -Wp,-D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-cc1 -fstack-protector-strong -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-annobin-cc1 -m64 -mtune=generic -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection -fcf-protection -DNDEBUG' -DCMAKE_VERBOSE_MAKEFILE:BOOL=TRUE -DCMAKE_SKIP_INSTALL_RPATH:BOOL=YES -DNATIVEJIT_VERSION_MAJOR=0 -DNATIVEJIT_VERSION=0 CMake Error at CMakeLists.txt:3 (cmake_minimum_required): cmake_minimum_required called with unknown argument "[FATAL_ERROR]". -- The CXX compiler identification is GNU 11.0.0 -- The C compiler identification is GNU 11.0.0 -- Detecting CXX compiler ABI info -- Detecting CXX compiler ABI info - done -- Check for working CXX compiler: /usr/bin/g++ - skipped -- Detecting CXX compile features -- Detecting CXX compile features - done -- Detecting C compiler ABI info -- Detecting C compiler ABI info - done -- Check for working C compiler: /usr/bin/gcc - skipped -- Detecting C compile features -- Detecting C compile features - done -- NativeJIT is root -- Found GTest: /usr/lib64/libgtest.so -- Configuring incomplete, errors occurred! See also "/builddir/build/BUILD/nativejit-v0.0/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu/CMakeFiles/CMakeOutput.log". See also "/builddir/build/BUILD/nativejit-v0.0/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu/CMakeFiles/CMakeError.log". I am attaching CMakeOutput.log and CMakeError.log. In addition to the problem with cmake_minimum_required, it looks like there are problems with using C++ flags on a C source, which are being treated as errors. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1933988] Review Request: nativejit - Library for high-performance just-in-time compilation of expressions involving C data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933988 --- Comment #2 from Antonio T. sagitter --- COPASI team uses own mirrors for COPASI dependencies (https://github.com/copasi/copasi-dependencies); since it is code recently modified/adapted (instead BitFunnel/NativeJIT commits code in April 2018 last time), i chose to take away 'copasi-dependencies/tree/master/src/NativeJIT' in a new separated GitLab project (https://gitlab.com/anto.trande/nativejit) and push there all my changes instead of filling of patches the SRPM. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1933988] Review Request: nativejit - Library for high-performance just-in-time compilation of expressions involving C data structures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933988 Elliott Sales de Andrade changed: What|Removed |Added CC||quantum.anal...@gmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value --- Comment #1 from Elliott Sales de Andrade --- Why such an odd URL? If this is truly an external dependency of COPASI, shouldn't you be packaging the upstream sources? Those appear to be at https://github.com/BitFunnel/NativeJIT -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
