Stream: t-compiler/wg-prioritization/alerts

Topic: I-prioritize #76466 Linker error with wasm target with spac…

triagebot (Sep 08 2020 at 09:13, on Zulip):

@WG-prioritization/alerts issue #76466 has been requested for prioritization.

Procedure

apiraino (Sep 08 2020 at 12:44, on Zulip):

based on Santiago's heuristics :-P this should probably be tagged as P-critical even if it's Tier-2. The reporter also kindly did some bisecting and we have a candidate culprit (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/commit/5180f3da5fd72627a8d38558ad1297df38793acd)

I'm slightly confused and curious by how that commit can cause that error :thinking:

LeSeulArtichaut (Sep 08 2020 at 15:00, on Zulip):

@apiraino that’s only the commit of the culprit nightly

apiraino (Sep 08 2020 at 17:35, on Zulip):

do you mean that there may be another bug behind (in some other component, such as the lld linker as the reporter suggests) that nightly?

Santiago Pastorino (Sep 09 2020 at 19:38, on Zulip):

@apiraino what @LeSeulArtichaut suggested is that, that's the commit with which the nightly version they are using was generated but it's not the offending commit

Santiago Pastorino (Sep 09 2020 at 19:38, on Zulip):

we would need to run cargo-bisect-rustc to find out which one is the offending commit

Santiago Pastorino (Sep 09 2020 at 19:40, on Zulip):

I'm not sure about the priority of this one but could totally be P-critical

Santiago Pastorino (Sep 09 2020 at 19:41, on Zulip):

non working wasm seems bad to me

Santiago Pastorino (Sep 09 2020 at 19:41, on Zulip):

but it may be windows only

Santiago Pastorino (Sep 09 2020 at 19:41, on Zulip):

unsure

Santiago Pastorino (Sep 09 2020 at 19:41, on Zulip):

we would need someone to find out a bit more info

Santiago Pastorino (Sep 09 2020 at 20:21, on Zulip):

@WG-prioritization this is one of the last issues to prioritize

Santiago Pastorino (Sep 09 2020 at 20:21, on Zulip):

in my opinion P-critical or P-high

apiraino (Sep 09 2020 at 20:24, on Zulip):

fwiw I had voted for a p-critical (out of caution). Perhaps a closer look by the relevant team could possibly help

apiraino (Sep 16 2020 at 12:37, on Zulip):

ping about this. Suggestions?

DPC (Sep 16 2020 at 12:41, on Zulip):

i'm tempted to mark this p-high till we know the commit causing it, but critical is fine as well

apiraino (Sep 16 2020 at 12:49, on Zulip):

right, it will get some attention during the meeting and probably help finding someone to give a closer look. Not a lot more to add at this time, unfortunately.

triagebot (Sep 16 2020 at 12:52, on Zulip):

Issue #76466's prioritization request has been removed.

Mason Stallmo (Sep 16 2020 at 22:30, on Zulip):

Just ran bisect and the commit range from 663d2f5 to 5180f3d passed with no issues. Re-reading through the issue it may be on a 32-bit Windows host instead of 64-bit Windows host

Mason Stallmo (Sep 16 2020 at 22:32, on Zulip):

I noticed in the rustc --version --verbose output the host is listed as host: i686-pc-windows-msvc instead of x86_64-pc-windows-msvc

Mason Stallmo (Sep 16 2020 at 22:33, on Zulip):

I will run bisect on my Linux machine to check there as well but it's possible this is only a regression on 32-bit Windows machines.

Mason Stallmo (Sep 16 2020 at 22:48, on Zulip):

Same result on my 64-bit Linux machine. bisect-rustc is passing with no issues

Santiago Pastorino (Sep 17 2020 at 03:29, on Zulip):

@Mason Stallmo maybe comment on the issue with all that information?

Mason Stallmo (Sep 17 2020 at 04:18, on Zulip):

Will do!

apiraino (Sep 17 2020 at 06:59, on Zulip):

great job @Mason Stallmo :thumbs_up:

Mason Stallmo (Sep 17 2020 at 15:47, on Zulip):

Thanks! :smiley:

Last update: Apr 11 2021 at 19:15UTC