From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id AM6QBU793l+bRAAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2020 07:29:18 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2 with LMTPS id ZtJOAU793l8GNQAAB5/wlQ (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2020 07:29:18 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D9009408EF for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2020 07:29:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:41778 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kqt9Y-0008G1-7T for larch@yhetil.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2020 02:29:16 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52890) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kqt9L-0008AF-1e for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2020 02:29:03 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:60281) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kqt9K-0004rW-JG for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2020 02:29:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kqt9K-0007jm-EW for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2020 02:29:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#41669: Cross-compiled powerpc64-linux bootstrap-tarballs not reproducible Resent-From: Chris Marusich Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 07:29:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 41669 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Leo Le Bouter , Efraim Flashner , Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= , 41669@debbugs.gnu.org, Maxim Cournoyer , Vincent Legoll Received: via spool by 41669-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B41669.160844929829687 (code B ref 41669); Sun, 20 Dec 2020 07:29:02 +0000 Received: (at 41669) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Dec 2020 07:28:18 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43594 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kqt8b-0007il-La for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2020 02:28:18 -0500 Received: from mail-pl1-f173.google.com ([209.85.214.173]:41233) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kqt8Y-0007iX-RB for 41669@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2020 02:28:16 -0500 Received: by mail-pl1-f173.google.com with SMTP id y8so3934225plp.8 for <41669@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 19 Dec 2020 23:28:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent :mime-version; bh=gJq51H1/HFSaGe5wqjWIwhaLInFZH7uzpNuJi8bti4Q=; b=pMqIV2s7ut3amXPv5VxU7uIwuuJx3WoQx8p1TXfdOyWztQPm9LIiI/QoWvvOFjfA1S 0dPiyRs47g+y7E3O4QNHUC3ARFTpeFN9CQ9ZB5al9ePz5V+kWGnSunbe22W7lk5YEYyJ yPuyVXIXhFBC26/KaoesC/SUqrap5MI7fwDNfAGcrqLwn/eGwrUog/glpi0NicyT9YP8 LNVu+2mYqimP14GHGKejdvd7fKBhTxB9pFKgbRo0PiAa2FvtAtHFwpyFT1047W2NFixl OqMKUmdXG562qiBqFFs0YGAbKDlKAkpRin5zxVhiZi1irnifmw/w0uDdg1rVEu8Sxru+ +0gA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=gJq51H1/HFSaGe5wqjWIwhaLInFZH7uzpNuJi8bti4Q=; b=Dkdu9qEr+6QjRnHDOYFGTs905dx8gU1wycfz4ZN/+VBxIRHogdQ1pdgDUo4mWupSiW 0yI/VkE1Mre7pogz2Y436NZ9VsCzskM1vF3taGm+yWic4+Pa5heMCYLyhN+Td6Mu2acd jFMZVAtC1m0nwGL8vJcjrsk45B3DP57hoyN8/O+Hz8glfriEZS1wAm97WE1Sl0VCQ+6J /+qx84pxWpiXQ/tBs2tR8aWl1fuMOpMMlOoeZZ0XT07Js3fhcKwiTrcJ7xDcjpotVszb ngvaFU4bYubaMOjsniJk9Pz1S3RVTGJmlqNrqEAojmHNI04Xjg4PIl8CEuen6rHLVvi+ SB2A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532z+pKEf0/1kmqIouBWgp+CRT54L1DAXs3JOd1UMUsfney+0YAs hNCjpNpdld/BPspO6B8kF5I= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy6zZiDN/xIHDVH9NSIO1Z8hW16daMTa/oX/Vhm8uNWOeIP34Xr/tgCH9QAiTYu1hpbbBE66Q== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:a24:: with SMTP id o33mr11993925pjo.191.1608449288766; Sat, 19 Dec 2020 23:28:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from garuda-lan ([2601:601:9d00:688::c9a]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c205sm13027525pfc.160.2020.12.19.23.28.07 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 19 Dec 2020 23:28:07 -0800 (PST) From: Chris Marusich References: <87wo0hqbb3.fsf@gmail.com> <874krtnvk8.fsf@gmail.com> <87y2p4mqe2.fsf@gmail.com> <87a6xu2xrj.fsf@gmail.com> <20200913062858.GC1100@E5400> <87wo0hqbb3.fsf@gmail.com> <87pn5wzwcf.fsf@gnu.org> <87pn3dth0l.fsf_-_@gmail.com> <874krtnvk8.fsf@gmail.com> <87y2p4mqe2.fsf@gmail.com> <87a6xu2xrj.fsf@gmail.com> <20200913062858.GC1100@E5400> <87wo0hqbb3.fsf@gmail.com> <874krtnvk8.fsf@gmail.com> <87y2p4mqe2.fsf@gmail.com> <87a6xu2xrj.fsf@gmail.com> <20200913062858.GC1100@E5400> <87wo0hqbb3.fsf@gmail.com> <87pn5wzwcf.fsf@gnu.org> <87pn3dth0l.fsf_-_@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2020 23:28:03 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Leo Le Bouter's message of "Mon, 14 Dec 2020 11:34:35 +0100, Mon, 14 Dec 2020 10:17:21 +0200, Mon, 14 Dec 2020 09:36:09 +0100") Message-ID: <87blepaqd8.fsf_-_@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-guix@gnu.org List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -1.81 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail (headers rsa verify failed) header.d=gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=pMqIV2s7; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=gmail.com (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 3D9009408EF X-Spam-Score: -1.81 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn1.migadu.com X-TUID: mSHEUxXrx8I5 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, It's great to see forward motion again! Efraim Flashner writes: > As far as powerpc64 vs powerpc64le, I'll let those with the hardware > have more of a say, they'll be the ones using it. As far as the > bootstrap binaries go, I don't remember having this much pushback with > my binaries for aarch64 (just a request to rebuild with guile-2.0.14 > since it was reproducible), and I'm not sure how much Janneke had with > the Hurd binaries but I don't think it was this much. The ultimate goal > anyway is to replace them with artisanally crafted mes binaries, and I > understand we want to have them as reproducible as possible, but I don't > think it's fair to keep this architecture out when we've let other ones > in with similar reproducible problems. Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: > I didn=E2=80=99t follow the whole discussion nor did I try to investigate > myself, but thanks a lot for going to great lengths trying to identify > the issue; this is an impressive amount of work, and I can only share > your disappointment. > > Given this effort, I agree that it may be best at this point to move on > and start with these non-reproducible binaries. At least, the problem > is now documented. I'm glad you agree. For powerpc64 (big-endian), should we just make the changes for bootstrapping on the master branch, or should we use a separate branch? If we use a separate branch, we could use the name "wip-ppc64", since there is already a "wip-ppc64le" for powerpc64le. Is it expected that commits on these "wip" branches will never be modified (e.g., via rebasing)? Leo Le Bouter writes: >> Do you have a preference big-endian vs little endian? > > I'd like both but little endian has the widest eco-system support > especially w.r.t. to Linux drivers. Many Linux drivers have endianness > bugs (lack of endian-safe serialization for DMA..), it's such a plague > that sticking to little endian is just better right now. One common > example being mpt3sas and amdgpu drivers required in some > configurations of the Talos II system. Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: >> At this point, it might even make more sense to try bootstrapping for >> powerpc64le instead of powerpc64, since the rest of the world seems to >> be gravitating toward the little-endian variant on POWER9 hardware, and >> thus various programs out there are more likely to be better tested on >> powerpc64le than powerpc64. > > Yes, my understanding is that other people, in particular Tobias Platen > and dftxbs3e, were looking at powerpc64le, so perhaps it=E2=80=99s a good= idea > to concentrate on that one? I agree. It's probably better to focus on little-endian. However, it isn't clear yet which will be ultimately harder for us to bootstrap, so I also think it's fine to work on both in parallel and see how it goes. Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: > Anyhow, please let me know if/when bootstrap binaries should be uploaded > to ftp.gnu.org (with a signed message). When updating bootstrap.scm to > refer to them, please include the commit ID used to build them in the > commit message. Over the last few days, Leo and I coordinated to try cross-compiling the powerpc64 bootstrap tarballs one more time, using two Guix System VMs. We did this because we thought that maybe if we took care to keep the Guix Systems "the same" (e.g., same kernel), it would produce identical results. Instead, the result was the same as before: all bootstrap tarballs except for gcc-static were identical, and gcc-static differed in ways similar to what has already been described earlier in this bug report. In fact, with the exception of gcc-static, the bootstrap tarballs were identical to the tarballs multiple people built 6 months ago in June. This means that (1) with the exception of gcc-static, the bootstrap tarballs build reproducibly even across systems and after quite a bit of change has taken place on the master branch, and (2) even when built from source on two separate, fresh, practically identical Guix System machines, without using substitutes, the gcc-static binary still differs. Now that we have decided to use these powerpc64 bootstrap tarballs, what are the next steps for uploading them to the GNU FTP server? I've never done that before, and I don't think I have access. For now I've put a signed copy of the powerpc64-linux (big endian) bootstrap tarballs, with a SHA-512 hash, here: https://media.marusich.info/guix-ppc64-bootstrap/bootstrap-tarballs-from-gu= ix-1ced8379c7.tar.xz https://media.marusich.info/guix-ppc64-bootstrap/bootstrap-tarballs-from-gu= ix-1ced8379c7.tar.xz.asc https://media.marusich.info/guix-ppc64-bootstrap/bootstrap-tarballs-from-gu= ix-1ced8379c7.tar.xz.sha512sum For the record, these bootstrap tarballs were built via the following steps: =2D Use https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/guix/guix-system-install-1.2.0.x86_64-linux.iso.xz to install Guix System 1.2.0 on an x86_64-linux machine. =2D Run: guix pull --no-substitutes --commit=3D1ced8379c7641788fa607b19b7a6= 6d18f045362b =2D Run: guix build --no-substitutes --target=3Dpowerpc64-linux-gnu bootstr= ap-tarballs =2D I didn't run "guix system reconfigure" after installing Guix System; theoretically it shouldn't matter, but for the purpose of our experiment, I just left the system in its default configuration in order to ensure that the kernel etc. would be the same on both VMs. Once we get these binaries into the GNU FTP server, I'll get started on updating gnu/packages/bootstrap.scm and other files necessary to begin bootstrapping powerpc64-linux. I'll mainly be adapting the work that Leo already did, and following the lead of others like Efraim and his work on the wip-ppc branch. I will probably have questions as I go, so I'll ask on guix-devel. Please let me know if you'd like this done on a special branch. =2D-=20 Chris --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEy/WXVcvn5+/vGD+x3UCaFdgiRp0FAl/e/QMACgkQ3UCaFdgi Rp0HtRAAjn883AZMDTqduot7bySWoCfuRQHFqmiA8+1i4RmIcD56E6XuCnL/YIWI LZF0QVqyMaZdPCtf2ZjNyeZoQi0u//y33fVd1Ju+c/rynlMqysLh4Ka+OTLnQVk8 t7sGSK/JfpvKmpAFkLJpZd1q/z/hDasZklupl8CLBYDnZpKZeruvpzRn8NwyMux9 6iJ2bYtXRkvTLk39DFozWYT+9sSsy6cmz9SWtaz09g5aNE2mlscMxVQ0JuIy2v/D EdVa286sEt481KqpoiAPJ08Bthtx2ZUmiRzR1vdaiN+WsckAWmJ8FJC5/Me+FkHB xGRi025RFm9s863DSi9qf0NdzSApeJ3ixHErd2rR2nFxNgBTH9PRPqUfXdQ4KBFd ja+2op3hKx9Y9NLlg8fWdI9Xbue1qLQMDmWxrSyKSzcvzn34IRgg9OK2BOg20d3W LLYCfwO7p0f8Ozf+U7lE1nN9GDAhVqx3jNWnRmtKMN0jaFcjwECkNoiYcQfLFgo/ MVcETGCvwNtQYAsOAFwda3aJKQ8z8tjN+H6AGxzJOlB6qGmEq15adshG0b/EFuC6 4QuftjdxAkDlwl7/hPXVoH/vwX+hHwq77r1f0fys52hpNzjipnqsNRu9HjVcbZ4A jC9dsZa5j3RHXy//lRMWBpHN8Y1t4p8dL3C4msj5pxmNiefWLQY= =Ai5P -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--