https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2335652
Bug ID: 2335652 Summary: Review Request: rocm-omp - ROCm OpenMP Product: Fedora Version: rawhide OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: Tom.Rix@amd.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://trix.fedorapeople.org/rocm-omp.spec SRPM URL: https://trix.fedorapeople.org/rocm-omp-6.3.1-1.fc42.src.rpm
In F42 ROCm is using a bundled llvm in rocm-compilersupport. The compat llvm 18 is being orphaned.
This package provides the OpenMP functionality of compat llvm. Because it also adds offload to gpu functionality, it needs to be built after the rocm runtime. So it needs it's own package.
This package is needed now by the rocm-rpp package.
Reproducible: Always
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2335652
Tom.Rix@amd.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |2335650 Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2335650 [Bug 2335650] Review Request: mivisionx - AMD toolkit for computer vision and machine intelligence
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2335652
Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |AutomationTriaged URL| |https://github.com/ROCm/%%7Bu | |pstreamname}
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8472432 (succeeded)
Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-rev...
Please take a look if any issues were found.
--- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service
If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2335652
--- Comment #2 from Jeremy Newton alexjnewt@fastmail.com --- As a good practice, you should clean up the source you don't need in %prep if you don't need most of this. It makes it more clear what subset you're building, and it makes the source licensing clearer.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2335652
--- Comment #3 from Jeremy Newton alexjnewt@fastmail.com --- Furthermore, you should add a rocm-llvm-filesystem package that owns the following, and have this package require it: /usr/lib64/rocm/llvm/lib/clang /usr/lib64/rocm/llvm/lib/cmake /usr/lib64/rocm/llvm/lib/clang/18/include /usr/lib64/rocm/llvm/include /usr/lib64/rocm/llvm/lib /usr/lib64/rocm/llvm/lib/clang/18 /usr/lib64/rocm/llvm /usr/lib64/rocm/llvm/bin
If a user installs just rocm-omp, then uninstalls the package, it will orphan those directories. Having the filesystem package allows them to still have ownership, and dnf will auto clean up the leaf package.
I noticed it complains of: Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in rocm- omp-static
But static actually requires devel which requires the base package. Anyway, false positive.
Also you used defines here: Note: %define requiring justification: %define __sourcedir openmp, %define _vpath_srcdir openmp Not sure of the reason, but you need to comment it.
Finally, not sure what this rpmlint output is about: rocm-omp-static.x86_64: E: static-library-without-symtab /usr/lib64/rocm/llvm/lib/libomptarget.devicertl.a rocm-omp-static.x86_64: E: static-library-without-debuginfo /usr/lib64/rocm/llvm/lib/libomptarget.devicertl.a rocm-omp-static.x86_64: E: lto-no-text-in-archive /usr/lib64/rocm/llvm/lib/libomptarget.devicertl.a rocm-omp-devel.x86_64: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib64/rocm/llvm/lib/libomp.so libomp.so
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2335652
Jeremy Newton alexjnewt@fastmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |alexjnewt@fastmail.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2335652
--- Comment #4 from Tom.Rix@amd.com --- Spec URL: https://trix.fedorapeople.org/rocm-omp.spec SRPM URL: https://trix.fedorapeople.org/rocm-omp-6.3.1-1.fc42.src.rpm
[ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib64/rocm/llvm, /usr/lib64/rocm, /usr/lib64/rocm/llvm/lib
rocm-compilersupport / rocm-rpm-macros are being reworked so the ownership of the %libdir/rocm belongs to rocm-compilersupport, here
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rocm-compilersupport/blob/rawhide/f/rocm-...
%define _vpath_srcdir openmp was simplied to cd openmp
rocm-omp, like the rest of the rocm packages will be also used for SUSE, and SUSE does its %cmake a little differently.
I am not sure about errors for libomptarget.devicertl.a, it looks like this library is made up of AMDGPU objects and not normal X86 objects.
libomp.so. This is consistent with system and compat clang, there are no versions.
libomp-19.1.6-2.fc42.x86_64 : OpenMP runtime for clang Repo : @System Matched From : Filename : /usr/lib64/libomp.so
libomp18-18.1.8-3.fc42.x86_64 : OpenMP runtime for clang Repo : rawhide Matched From : Filename : /usr/lib64/llvm18/lib/libomp.so
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2335652
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Created attachment 2067008 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2067008&action=edit The .spec file difference from Copr build 8472432 to 8558142
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2335652
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8558142 (succeeded)
Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-rev...
Please take a look if any issues were found.
--- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service
If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2335652
Tom.Rix@amd.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |2341286
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2341286 [Bug 2341286] rocm-rpp: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f42
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2335652
--- Comment #7 from Jeremy Newton alexjnewt@fastmail.com --- Just realised some files are apache licensed.
We might need it in rocm-llvm too: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/%40fedora-review/fedora-r...
Can you give it a quick skim?
Other than that, it seems fine. Some false positives in the fedora review output, but it seems fine.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2335652
--- Comment #8 from Tom.Rix@amd.com --- Spec URL: https://trix.fedorapeople.org/rocm-omp.spec SPRM URL: https://trix.fedorapeople.org/rocm-omp-6.3.1-1.fc42.src.rpm
Change is to copy the license from the old libomp package https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libomp/blob/f40/f/libomp.spec#_41 Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception OR NCSA
Then for ROCm parts add AND MIT
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2335652
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Created attachment 2074043 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2074043&action=edit The .spec file difference from Copr build 8558142 to 8578163
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2335652
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8578163 (succeeded)
Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-rev...
Please take a look if any issues were found.
--- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service
If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2335652
Jeremy Newton alexjnewt@fastmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-review+ Status|NEW |POST
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2335652
Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions fedora-admin-xmlrpc@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |RELEASE_PENDING
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions fedora-admin-xmlrpc@fedoraproject.org --- The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rocm-omp
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2335652
Tom.Rix@amd.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Status|RELEASE_PENDING |CLOSED Last Closed| |2025-04-10 00:22:09
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org