Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

don't disable optarch for Clang 11.0.0 #11814

Merged

Conversation

bartoldeman
Copy link
Contributor

(created using eb --new-pr)

@bartoldeman
Copy link
Contributor Author

@boegelbot please test @ generoso EB_ARGS="--include-easyblocks-from-pr 2264"

@bartoldeman
Copy link
Contributor Author

This needs easybuilders/easybuild-easyblocks#2264

@boegelbot
Copy link
Collaborator

@bartoldeman: Request for testing this PR well received on generoso

PR test command 'EB_PR=11814 EB_ARGS="--include-easyblocks-from-pr 2264" /apps/slurm/default/bin/sbatch --job-name test_PR_11814 --ntasks=4 ~/boegelbot/eb_from_pr_upload_generoso.sh' executed!

  • exit code: 0
  • output:
Submitted batch job 12188

Test results coming soon (I hope)...

- notification for comment with ID 738154656 processed

Message to humans: this is just bookkeeping information for me,
it is of no use to you (unless you think I have a bug, which I don't).

@Micket
Copy link
Contributor

Micket commented Dec 3, 2020

@bartoldeman Any comment on the issue with optarch? Is the comment simply wrong?

@bartoldeman
Copy link
Contributor Author

bartoldeman commented Dec 3, 2020

@bartoldeman Any comment on the issue with optarch? Is the comment simply wrong?

@Micket the comment is obsolete, it's copied from an earlier version but I had no issue building it with that line removed.
It dates back all the way to

Clang-3.4-GCC-4.8.2.eb:# Do not set optarch to True: it will cause the build to fail
Clang-3.4-GCC-4.8.2.eb:toolchainopts = {'optarch': False}

but has never been checked after I guess

@bartoldeman
Copy link
Contributor Author

relevant commit for optarch:
fb453ae

Micket
Micket previously approved these changes Dec 3, 2020
Copy link
Contributor

@Micket Micket left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm (test build is going to take ages)

@Micket
Copy link
Contributor

Micket commented Dec 3, 2020

Test report by @Micket
Using easyblocks from PR(s) easybuilders/easybuild-easyblocks#2264
FAILED
Build succeeded for 0 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total)
vera-c1 - Linux centos linux 7.8.2003, x86_64, Intel Xeon Processor (Skylake), Python 2.7.5
See https://gist.github.com/18c997407aa03ea758afdf3d2cc96b25 for a full test report.

@Micket
Copy link
Contributor

Micket commented Dec 3, 2020

I was wrong, it was very quick. Hmm

/local/EB/build/Clang/11.0.0/GCCcore-9.3.0/llvm-11.0.0.src/tools/lldb/bindings/./python/python-typemaps.swig:484: Error: Syntax error in input(3).
481 struct Py_buffer_RAII {
482   Py_buffer buffer = {};
483   Py_buffer_RAII() {};
484   Py_buffer &operator=(const Py_buffer_RAII &) = delete;
485   Py_buffer_RAII(const Py_buffer_RAII &) = delete;
486   ~Py_buffer_RAII() {
487     if (buffer.obj)
488       PyBuffer_Release(&buffer);
489   }
490 };

Looks fine to me, so I'm not sure what goes wrong here.

@bartoldeman
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Micket perhaps it needs a build dep on swig, I my log I have:

-- Found SWIG: /cvmfs/soft.computecanada.ca/gentoo/2020/usr/bin/swig (found suitable version "3.0.12", minimum required is "2.0") 

perhaps you picked up an OS SWIG that is now too old.

@bartoldeman
Copy link
Contributor Author

I added the SWIG builddep because it's a good idea in any case.

Co-authored-by: Mikael Öhman <micketeer@gmail.com>
Micket
Micket previously approved these changes Dec 3, 2020
Copy link
Contributor

@Micket Micket left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm

@boegelbot
Copy link
Collaborator

Test report by @boegelbot
Using easyblocks from PR(s) easybuilders/easybuild-easyblocks#2264
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total)
generoso-c1-s-1 - Linux centos linux 8.2.2004, x86_64, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2667 v3 @ 3.20GHz (haswell), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/42f09565d748a492bf1fa6feab2d8ad3 for a full test report.

@bartoldeman
Copy link
Contributor Author

@boegelbot please test @ generoso EB_ARGS="--include-easyblocks-from-pr 2264"

@bartoldeman
Copy link
Contributor Author

I asked the always friendly looking bot to do another build with the SWIG builddep

@boegelbot
Copy link
Collaborator

@bartoldeman: Request for testing this PR well received on generoso

PR test command 'EB_PR=11814 EB_ARGS="--include-easyblocks-from-pr 2264" /apps/slurm/default/bin/sbatch --job-name test_PR_11814 --ntasks=4 ~/boegelbot/eb_from_pr_upload_generoso.sh' executed!

  • exit code: 0
  • output:
Submitted batch job 12189

Test results coming soon (I hope)...

- notification for comment with ID 738357106 processed

Message to humans: this is just bookkeeping information for me,
it is of no use to you (unless you think I have a bug, which I don't).

@Micket
Copy link
Contributor

Micket commented Dec 3, 2020

Test report by @Micket
Using easyblocks from PR(s) easybuilders/easybuild-easyblocks#2264
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total)
vera-c1 - Linux centos linux 7.8.2003, x86_64, Intel Xeon Processor (Skylake), Python 2.7.5
See https://gist.github.com/189e66058b6e606f9ed00c1e03d44019 for a full test report.

@Micket
Copy link
Contributor

Micket commented Dec 3, 2020

@bartoldeman So.. Python turns out to be a runtime dependency;

$ lldb
lldb: error while loading shared libraries: libpython3.8.so.1.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory

@Micket Micket dismissed their stale review December 3, 2020 23:42

i was wrong

@Micket
Copy link
Contributor

Micket commented Dec 4, 2020

So, options as i see them

  1. Just have python as a dependency here. Hurts a bit for a compiler though, since it means no multi-deps for anything using Clang.
  2. Try to separate LLDB into a different module (probably painful) and let that module depend on Python.
  3. Disable SWIG (we should probably enhance the easyblock to explicitly disable SWIG if no SWIG-dep is used regardless).

I assume python dep comes from SWIG? If not, then, well, option 3 just disappears.

@bartoldeman
Copy link
Contributor Author

Maybe 2 (seperate lldb) is not too hard. Can give that a go.

@boegelbot
Copy link
Collaborator

Test report by @boegelbot
Using easyblocks from PR(s) easybuilders/easybuild-easyblocks#2264
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total)
generoso-c1-s-1 - Linux centos linux 8.2.2004, x86_64, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2667 v3 @ 3.20GHz (haswell), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/34a31cb7764f5e67f2b9e3af4edf7238 for a full test report.

@bartoldeman
Copy link
Contributor Author

bartoldeman commented Dec 4, 2020

#11822 does LLDB now. Though we can still remove the optarch line I guess.

@verdurin
Copy link
Member

verdurin commented Jan 4, 2021

@bartoldeman what's the latest on this one?

@bartoldeman
Copy link
Contributor Author

still the same, I forgot about this one :(. Will adjust

Only keep the optarch change
@easybuilders easybuilders deleted a comment from boegelbot Jan 5, 2021
@easybuilders easybuilders deleted a comment from boegelbot Jan 5, 2021
@easybuilders easybuilders deleted a comment from boegelbot Jan 5, 2021
@boegel boegel added this to the 4.x milestone Jan 5, 2021
@boegel boegel changed the title Clang: build lldb, don't disable optarch don't disable optarch for Clang 11.0.0 Jan 5, 2021
@boegel
Copy link
Member

boegel commented Jan 5, 2021

@boegelbot please test @ generoso

@boegelbot
Copy link
Collaborator

@boegel: Request for testing this PR well received on generoso

PR test command 'EB_PR=11814 EB_ARGS= /apps/slurm/default/bin/sbatch --job-name test_PR_11814 --ntasks=4 ~/boegelbot/eb_from_pr_upload_generoso.sh' executed!

  • exit code: 0
  • output:
Submitted batch job 12371

Test results coming soon (I hope)...

- notification for comment with ID 754522127 processed

Message to humans: this is just bookkeeping information for me,
it is of no use to you (unless you think I have a bug, which I don't).

@boegel
Copy link
Member

boegel commented Jan 5, 2021

Test report by @boegel
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total)
node3501.doduo.os - Linux RHEL 8.2, x86_64, AMD EPYC 7552 48-Core Processor (zen2), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/c0a3e5e706d079a452c1225eb533affe for a full test report.

@boegel
Copy link
Member

boegel commented Jan 5, 2021

Test report by @boegel
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total)
node2641.swalot.os - Linux centos linux 7.9.2009, x86_64, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2660 v3 @ 2.60GHz (haswell), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/24739a83ed6099ce78dc782377689c97 for a full test report.

@verdurin
Copy link
Member

verdurin commented Jan 5, 2021

Test report by @verdurin
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total)
nuc.lan - Linux Fedora 32, x86_64, Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-8650U CPU @ 1.90GHz, Python 3.8.6
See https://gist.github.com/b8f3779c8492b96e4ccd401cf7ab3f8f for a full test report.

Copy link
Member

@verdurin verdurin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks fine.

@boegelbot
Copy link
Collaborator

Test report by @boegelbot
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total)
generoso-x-2 - Linux centos linux 8.2.2004, x86_64, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2667 v3 @ 3.20GHz (haswell), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/9212af51c336674d445a260c1d98cdea for a full test report.

@boegel
Copy link
Member

boegel commented Jan 5, 2021

Going in, thanks @bartoldeman!

@boegel boegel merged commit 2880377 into easybuilders:develop Jan 5, 2021
@boegel boegel modified the milestones: 4.x, next release (4.3.3?) Jan 5, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants