From owner-freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Thu Jun 4 18:15:46 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DD3732BE15 for ; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 18:15:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49dDVB3Gp9z4SXN for ; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 18:15:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 6EAB232BE14; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 18:15:46 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: bugs@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E7AC32BB3C for ; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 18:15:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49dDVB2N2Fz4SXM for ; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 18:15:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CDBF23AB3 for ; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 18:15:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 054IFkQ6053670 for ; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 18:15:46 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 054IFkdN053658 for bugs@FreeBSD.org; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 18:15:46 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 246630] stable/11 regression: base.txz reproducibility depends on number of cpu cores Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2020 18:15:45 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: bin X-Bugzilla-Version: Unspecified X-Bugzilla-Keywords: regression X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: dim@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: Open X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: bugs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2020 18:15:46 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D246630 --- Comment #30 from Dimitry Andric --- (In reply to Fabian Keil from comment #29) That's very strange. I could fairly easily reproduce the different printf.o output by building either with "make -j2", or with "make" on the same machi= ne.=20 Since "make -j" appears to mess around with ttys and stderr, it could expla= in the slightly different memory contents of the program at startup. In any ca= se, removing the integrated cc1 stage always resulted in the same printf.o outp= ut. Are you saying you ran the same build on different machines? Are you 100% s= ure that all the includes pulled into printf.c were exactly the same? Is there = any way you can do a sha256sum of the .i files? > Maybe there's a relevant difference between the clang 10.0.0 in stable/11= and the more recent one in HEAD. I don't think so, head has 10.0.1-rc1, but it showed precisely the effects I mentioned before. Disabling integrated cc1 fixed it for me. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=