haampie added a comment. Herald added a subscriber: ormris. Hi @tra and @yaxunl, I'm commenting as a reviewer of the spack pull request for the rocm 4.2.0 ecosystem. First of all: thanks for caring about spack installations, that's highly appreciated.
However, this patch does not seem the right approach to me, for a couple reasons: 1. LLVM should not be aware of spack -- it doesn't make sense. Spack doesn't even have a stable 1.0 release, expect it to break and inconsistent between versions. 2. It's incorrect in multiple ways: (a) the directory structure name is configurable in spack, not everybody has this <name>-<version>-<hash> structure, so you shouldn't rely on it, (b) you are still not guaranteed to pick up the correct llvm-amdgpu because it may be installed in a chained repo on a shared HPC system, and it won't be in the same prefix folder at all (c) spack's main selling point is it supports multiple installs of one package (a hash also changes for the same llvm version if a downstream dep such as zlib is updated), this patch just bails when it detect multiple installations Let's step back a bit. The problem you seem to be solving is the circular dependency between llvm and rocm-device-libs which are separate packages in spack; clang can't know where rocm-device-libs is at compile time because rocm-device-libs depends on llvm. Clearly the solution is to build llvm together with rocm-device-libs, as explained in the readme of https://github.com/RadeonOpenCompute/ROCm-Device-Libs, we can fix that in spack by adding a `resource` in the llvm package to pull in more sources, and LLVM can happily live without knowing about spack. Thanks, Harmen Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D97340/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D97340 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
