[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Investigating a reproducibility failure
From: |
Konrad Hinsen |
Subject: |
Re: Investigating a reproducibility failure |
Date: |
Thu, 03 Feb 2022 18:05:43 +0100 |
Hi Ricardo and Simon,
Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> writes:
> The case of OpenBLAS is an anomaly in that this mechanism seems to
> produce different binaries dependent on where it is built. When I first
Thanks a lot for those explanations, I hadn't realized how peculiar
OpenBLAS is!
> Your problem is that the OpenBLAS build system doesn’t recognize your
> modern CPU. Ideally, it wouldn’t need to know anything about the
> build-time CPU to build all the different code paths for different CPU
> features. The only way around this — retroactively — is to pretend to
> have an older CPU, e.g. by using qemu.
So all we need is a "QEMU build system" in Guix, just for OpenBLAS ;-)
> The new “--tune” feature is supposed to take care of cases like this.
Right, I remember Ludo's blog post about this.
zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes:
> Somehow, “recent” processors cannot build old versions.
That's a whole new level of planned obsolescence!
Cheers,
Konrad.
- Investigating a reproducibility failure, Konrad Hinsen, 2022/02/01
- Re: Investigating a reproducibility failure, zimoun, 2022/02/02
- Re: Investigating a reproducibility failure, zimoun, 2022/02/02
- Re: Investigating a reproducibility failure, zimoun, 2022/02/03
- Re: Investigating a reproducibility failure, Ludovic Courtès, 2022/02/05
- Re: Investigating a reproducibility failure, Bengt Richter, 2022/02/15
- Re: Investigating a reproducibility failure, zimoun, 2022/02/16
- Re: Investigating a reproducibility failure, Konrad Hinsen, 2022/02/16
- Re: Investigating a reproducibility failure, zimoun, 2022/02/17
- Re: Investigating a reproducibility failure, Konrad Hinsen, 2022/02/17