Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.kernel > #85313 > unrolled thread

Bug#1093200: Some packages consistently FTBFS with EFAULT (Bad address) on most mips64el buildds

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Bug#1093200: Some packages consistently FTBFS with EFAULT (Bad address) on most mips64el buildds Uwe Kleine-König <ukleinek@debian.org> - 2025-01-29 20:50 +0100
    Bug#1093200: Some packages consistently FTBFS with EFAULT (Bad address) on most mips64el buildds Sergei Golovan <sgolovan@debian.org> - 2025-02-04 10:10 +0100
      mips64el in trixie: [was: Bug#1093200: Some packages consistently  FTBFS with EFAULT (Bad address) on most mips64el buildds] Paul Gevers <elbrus@debian.org> - 2025-02-16 21:20 +0100
        Re: mips64el in trixie: [was: Bug#1093200: Some packages consistently  FTBFS with EFAULT (Bad address) on most mips64el buildds] Sergei Golovan <sgolovan@debian.org> - 2025-02-16 21:40 +0100
        Re: mips64el in trixie: [was: Bug#1093200: Some packages  consistently FTBFS with EFAULT (Bad address) on most mips64el buildds] Adrian Bunk <bunk@debian.org> - 2025-02-25 15:20 +0100

#85313 — Bug#1093200: Some packages consistently FTBFS with EFAULT (Bad address) on most mips64el buildds

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hello,

On Sun, Jan 19, 2025 at 11:41:04AM +0000, Simon McVittie wrote:
> Control: reassign -1 src:linux/6.1.76-1

I agree this looks like the kernel is at least involved in this problem.
Is someone able to do a bisect to help the kernel team to pinpoint the
issue?

Or does someone has a reproducer that also works for someone without
mips64el hardware (probably something involving qemu)?

Best regards
Uwe

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#85375

Hi!

On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 10:45 PM Uwe Kleine-König <ukleinek@debian.org> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I agree this looks like the kernel is at least involved in this problem.
> Is someone able to do a bisect to help the kernel team to pinpoint the
> issue?
>
> Or does someone has a reproducer that also works for someone without
> mips64el hardware (probably something involving qemu)?

I've tried to reproduce the Erlang FTBFS in qemu (both on malta and
loongson-virt machines) and failed to do so.
Also, I've found a thread on linux-kernel mailing list, which might be
relevant (see [1]). It describes some EFAULT on
mips64 which were introduced roughly at the same time when Erlang
started to FTBFS. I've run the test they
suggested (on qemu on loongson-virt machine).

The test program is compiled using gcc-14 (14.2.0-16).

The test program aborts on kernels 6.1.0-29-loongson-3 (6.1.123-1) and
6.12.10-loongson-3 (6.12.10-1)

The test program does not abort on kernel 5.10.0-30-loongson-3 (5.10.218-1)

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/mvmplxraqmd.fsf@suse.de/T/

Cheers!
-- 
Sergei Golovan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#85513 — mips64el in trixie: [was: Bug#1093200: Some packages consistently FTBFS with EFAULT (Bad address) on most mips64el buildds]

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Dear mips64el porters,

This is a warning from a Release Team member regarding the state of 
mips64el in Debian.

Unless Sergei considers himself a mips64el porter, I haven't seen 
activity of the mips64el porters on bug 1093200 and similar bugs where 
the porters were asked for help and thus cc-ed. Because of the 
seriousness of the problem, that's a very bad sign for the port.

I also like to hear your view on the topic of the Debian hosts, like it 
was raised in bug 1050872. I understand that there are difficulties 
upgrading existing hardware to bookworm (and later) kernels. Some hosts 
apparently are currently not upgradable. I also heard that newer 
hardware is incompatible with the ABI used in Debian. How do you see a 
future for mips64el in Debian?

Paul

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#85514 — Re: mips64el in trixie: [was: Bug#1093200: Some packages consistently FTBFS with EFAULT (Bad address) on most mips64el buildds]

Hi Paul,

On Sun, Feb 16, 2025 at 11:14 PM Paul Gevers <elbrus@debian.org> wrote:
>
> Dear mips64el porters,
>
> This is a warning from a Release Team member regarding the state of
> mips64el in Debian.
>
> Unless Sergei considers himself a mips64el porter,

I'm not a porter, I'm trying to help merely because packages I care about are
in trouble on mips64el...

Cheers!
-- 
Sergei Golovan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#86137 — Re: mips64el in trixie: [was: Bug#1093200: Some packages consistently FTBFS with EFAULT (Bad address) on most mips64el buildds]

On Sun, Feb 16, 2025 at 09:14:24PM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote:
>...
> I also like to hear your view on the topic of the Debian hosts, like it was
> raised in bug 1050872. I understand that there are difficulties upgrading
> existing hardware to bookworm (and later) kernels. Some hosts apparently are
> currently not upgradable.
>...

There are no running buildds left with pre-bookworm kernels.

> Paul

cu
Adrian

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.kernel

csiph-web