-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
rocm sdk 6.1.2 release #65
Comments
On Manjaro (and presumably Arch) building this branch fails due to the
But this doesn't seem to have landed as part of the general batch of fixes for Ubuntu. I can't easily produce a pull at the moment as I'm spread across machines but FWIW I've attached the (unsigned) patch, main credit still goes to Dani. |
Thanks, I somehow originally thought that the fix was only needed to install_deps.sh. Should have read more carefully. Based on to Danis comment, I now created the pr for this but I put @daniandtheweb as an author of the patch and you also signing it of. Is that OK. |
Manjaro and arch-linux patch is now merged. I also updated the hipBLASLt patches to remove some patch that was not needed. I also get rid of from hardcoding of rocm install dir and rocm llvm dir in aotriton build by making patches that pass the install dir as a build parameter. Similar type of patch is coming to aotriton, I am just still testing it on different environments. After those patches are in 6.1.2 branch, there should to my knowledge be any projects with hardcoded install directory. |
First 6.1.2 release seems actually contain much more new stuff and changes that I initially thought but I think we should at least try to
|
ROCm 6.2.0 was released almost a month ago now. Of course there's no rush in this particular project, but maybe we can consider 6.1.2 "good enough" to slap a release tag on it? Some of the binfos on master have started to target 6.2.0 already, it's probably a good idea to pick a commit at some point before that and stick a pin in it. Or switch to a rolling release, but I think there's worth in combining with a known ROCm version. There's no end to extra binfos you can add, so if that's the limiting factor you know there will never be a release. :) |
I agree, we start to be ready. I had used Fedora 40 and Mageia 9 mostly for testing and and when I did a builds on Ubuntu 22.04 and 24.04 I found some pytorch issues that needed to be fixed. The Ubuntu 24.04 one especially was weird, unlike on other distros, the linking failed for missing symbols in hsa-runtime until I added the search and link commands for it to cmakefiles... I don' The set command for hsa-runtime64 seemed that was in cmakefiles seemed not to be enought for ubuntu and I needed to add link command separately. t know why it's behaving differently there, cmake on ubuntu was 3.26.4... Just double testing on fedora and mageia that it did not break anything. Then just readme.md needs to be updated for new examples and babs.sh commands. |
Now that you mention that, I have also had build/link issues with the 64-bit lib split on Manjaro, even with all the appropriate env variables set, but these mostly concerned third-party applications not included with the repo itself. I didn't keep track of them as I went along; eventually I got sick enough of tweaking Makefiles that I just unified |
- fixes: #65 Signed-off-by: Mika Laitio <[email protected]>
- fixes: #65 Signed-off-by: Mika Laitio <[email protected]>
Done some release related work:
|
I started porting to 6.1.2 version and it's now on wip/rocm_sdk_builder_612
Changelog so far:
Plan still to check at least the aotriton, ucc and ucx package updates
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: