[Bug 1545479] Review Request: hcc- Heterogeneous C++ Compiler

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1545479



--- Comment #11 from Felix Schwarz <fschwarz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> ---
I'm mostly done with the review (still hoping that someone more experienced
will join here :-). Some questions+bikeshedding and one bigger issue.

Let's start with the most important one:
.so files in /usr/libexec/hcc/lib64/ are not stripped (manual stripping trims
the size from 1.5 GB to 47.2 MB). Unless there is a really good reason not to
strip these I think that needs to be taken care of.

Some questions/notes:
1. hcc depends on "hcc-runtime-devel" but I was wondering why "hcc-runtime" is
not sufficient. "hcc-runtime-devel" just contains unversioned .so files.
2. hcc also requires "rocminfo" but I was wondering where this is used or why
this is a dependency. If I grep for "rocminfo" in the sources it is only
mentioned when building a docker container.
3. "compiler-rt" and "cmake-tests" are removed. Would you mind providing some
rationale for this? Did I see correctly that "cmake-tests" requires that
"hc::accelerator()" returns something? (which might not work on build machines)
4. rpmlint complains about "executable stack" (.so files in /usr/lib64/). Is
this necessary for hcc?
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging_tricks#Executable_stack)
5. rpmlint complains that "/usr/libexec/hcc/lib64/libLLVM-8-rocm.so" contains
an invalid soname but AFAIK this is just an internal library which has no
soname at all.
6. The upstream "hcc" package declares a "NCSA" license but it contains some
files with a different license:
   Apache:
    - stl-test/*.pl.in
    - tests/Conformance

   Expat license:
    - lib/hsa/unpinned_copy_engine.*
    - hc2/external/elfio 

   3-clause BSD:
    - utils/gtest/

   Expat is probably similar enough to NCSA but I'm not sure what to do with
the others (only test code as far as I can see).


Bikeshedding:
- changelog: "1.3.18505-2.rocm2.0.0" is the latest but "1.3.19020-1.rocm2.0.0"
comes before (higher version number). Is that just actual recording of history
or due to some mishap?
- "HCC": I think you should use consistent upper-case spelling of HCC
- spelling in spec file: "trunck", "lincense"
- rpmlint says: "summary-not-capitalized" for various RPMs

-- 
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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite Conditions]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux