bug#45826: SBCL / Common Lisp packages fail to build on aarch64

bug#45826: SBCL / Common Lisp packages fail to build on aarch64

[Leo Famulari]

I noticed that many Common Lisp or SBCL-related packages are failing to
build on the aarc64 platform on our build farm, due the failure to build
SBCL:

From the log of <https://ci.guix.gnu.org/build/180326/details>:

------
//entering make-target-2.sh
//doing warm init - compilation phase
This is SBCL 2.1.0, an implementation of ANSI Common Lisp.
More information about SBCL is available at <http://www.sbcl.org/>.

SBCL is free software, provided as is, with absolutely no warranty.
It is mostly in the public domain; some portions are provided under
BSD-style licenses.  See the CREDITS and COPYING files in the
distribution for more information.
Initial page table:
Gen  Boxed   Code    Raw  LgBox LgCode  LgRaw  Pin       Alloc     Waste        Trig      WP GCs Mem-age
 6     397    250      0      0      0      0    0    42335440     66352     2000000     647   0  0.0000
           Total bytes allocated    =      42335440
           Dynamic-space-size bytes =    3221225472
COLD-INIT... (Length(TLFs)= 9736)
Disassembler: 72 printers, 0 prefilters, 4 labelers
CORRUPTION WARNING in SBCL pid 1774 tid 1774:
Memory fault at 0xfffffffffffffffa (pc=0x1002199f70)
The integrity of this image is possibly compromised.
Exiting.
Error opening /dev/tty: No such device or address
Welcome to LDB, a low-level debugger for the Lisp runtime environment.
ldb> 
real	0m6.120s
user	0m5.958s
sys	0m0.137s
command "sh" "make.sh" "clisp" "--prefix=/gnu/store/j1ciw4dc8iskd5fdcw0s1ba08kkg7vx6-sbcl-2.1.0" "--dynamic-space-size=3072" "--with-sb-core-compression" "--with-sb-xref-for-internals" failed with status 1
------

It appears that SBCL can support this platform. However, until we make
it work, I plan to remove aarch64 from the "supported-systems" of sbcl,
to avoid attempting these builds.

bug#45826: SBCL / Common Lisp packages fail to build on aarch64

[Guillaume Le Vaillant]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2154 bytes --]


Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> skribis:

> I noticed that many Common Lisp or SBCL-related packages are failing to
> build on the aarc64 platform on our build farm, due the failure to build
> SBCL:
>
> From the log of <https://ci.guix.gnu.org/build/180326/details>:
>
> ------
> //entering make-target-2.sh
> //doing warm init - compilation phase
> This is SBCL 2.1.0, an implementation of ANSI Common Lisp.
> More information about SBCL is available at <http://www.sbcl.org/>.
>
> SBCL is free software, provided as is, with absolutely no warranty.
> It is mostly in the public domain; some portions are provided under
> BSD-style licenses.  See the CREDITS and COPYING files in the
> distribution for more information.
> Initial page table:
> Gen  Boxed   Code    Raw  LgBox LgCode  LgRaw  Pin       Alloc     Waste        Trig      WP GCs Mem-age
>  6     397    250      0      0      0      0    0    42335440     66352     2000000     647   0  0.0000
>            Total bytes allocated    =      42335440
>            Dynamic-space-size bytes =    3221225472
> COLD-INIT... (Length(TLFs)= 9736)
> Disassembler: 72 printers, 0 prefilters, 4 labelers
> CORRUPTION WARNING in SBCL pid 1774 tid 1774:
> Memory fault at 0xfffffffffffffffa (pc=0x1002199f70)
> The integrity of this image is possibly compromised.
> Exiting.
> Error opening /dev/tty: No such device or address
> Welcome to LDB, a low-level debugger for the Lisp runtime environment.
> ldb> 
> real	0m6.120s
> user	0m5.958s
> sys	0m0.137s
> command "sh" "make.sh" "clisp" "--prefix=/gnu/store/j1ciw4dc8iskd5fdcw0s1ba08kkg7vx6-sbcl-2.1.0" "--dynamic-space-size=3072" "--with-sb-core-compression" "--with-sb-xref-for-internals" failed with status 1
> ------
>
> It appears that SBCL can support this platform. However, until we make
> it work, I plan to remove aarch64 from the "supported-systems" of sbcl,
> to avoid attempting these builds.

I tried to bootstrap sbcl using ecl instead of clisp, using
"guix build -s aarch64-linux sbcl" on a x86-64 machine because I don't
have any arm64 hardware, but it failed with the same memory fault.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 247 bytes --]

bug#45826: SBCL / Common Lisp packages fail to build on aarch64

[Leo Famulari]

On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 10:03:47PM +0100, Guillaume Le Vaillant wrote:
> I tried to bootstrap sbcl using ecl instead of clisp, using
> "guix build -s aarch64-linux sbcl" on a x86-64 machine because I don't
> have any arm64 hardware, but it failed with the same memory fault.

Thanks! On #guix, Efraim reported that the builds were succeeding on his
aarch64 hardware. So, I'm not sure what's going on :/

bug#45826: SBCL / Common Lisp packages fail to build on aarch64

[Guillaume Le Vaillant]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1245 bytes --]


Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> skribis:

> On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 10:03:47PM +0100, Guillaume Le Vaillant wrote:
>> I tried to bootstrap sbcl using ecl instead of clisp, using
>> "guix build -s aarch64-linux sbcl" on a x86-64 machine because I don't
>> have any arm64 hardware, but it failed with the same memory fault.
>
> Thanks! On #guix, Efraim reported that the builds were succeeding on his
> aarch64 hardware. So, I'm not sure what's going on :/

When taking a look at the logs of failing builds of sbcl-* packages on
aarch64-linux (for example at [1] for master or at [2] for staging),
I saw that the build jobs try to build sbcl (which is currently failing)
for every package.

I would have expected the builds for sbcl-* packages to be marked as
"failed because missing dependency" given that the main dependency of
the asdf-build-system/sbcl failed to build. Instead the build farm is
trying to rebuild sbcl over and over, which wastes quite some time and
resources.

It looks like the dependencies of the build system are not considered as
dependencies for the packages that use this build system.
Am I missing something?

[1] https://ci.guix.gnu.org/eval/31355?status=failed
[2] https://ci.guix.gnu.org/eval/20644?status=failed

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 247 bytes --]

bug#45826: SBCL / Common Lisp packages fail to build on aarch64

[Leo Famulari]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1291 bytes --]

On Sat, Jan 16, 2021 at 10:42:58AM +0100, Guillaume Le Vaillant wrote:
> When taking a look at the logs of failing builds of sbcl-* packages on
> aarch64-linux (for example at [1] for master or at [2] for staging),
> I saw that the build jobs try to build sbcl (which is currently failing)
> for every package.
> 
> I would have expected the builds for sbcl-* packages to be marked as
> "failed because missing dependency" given that the main dependency of
> the asdf-build-system/sbcl failed to build. Instead the build farm is
> trying to rebuild sbcl over and over, which wastes quite some time and
> resources.
> 
> It looks like the dependencies of the build system are not considered as
> dependencies for the packages that use this build system.
> Am I missing something?

That's a good observation. I hadn't thought of it.

I'm CC-ing Mathieu Othacehe and guix-sysadmin so that we can disable
these builds until we can fix the bug for real. Mathieu: this might
explain why the build farm is spending all its effort on aarch64.

By the way, SBCL can be built for aarch64 according to Efraim:

http://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2021-01-13.log#105652

So, the original point of this bug is obviated, and I'm re-titling it to
address your observation, Guillaume.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]