Hi Looks like only gluon test lambda is failing intermittently, but looks like a minor numerical issue.
http://jenkins.mxnet-ci.amazon-ml.com/blue/organizations/jenkins/ incubator-mxnet/detail/v1.2.0/20/pipeline I triggered a few builds yesterday and they all passed. I think Anirudh is right. Changing my vote to +1 (non binding). Pedro. On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 12:10 AM, Jun Wu <wujun....@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 > I built from source and ran all the model quantization examples > successfully. > > On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 3:05 PM, Anirudh <anirudh2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi Pedro, Haibin, Indhu, > > > > Thank you for your inputs on the release. I ran the test: > > `test_module.py:test_forward_reshape` for 250k times with different > seeds. > > I was unable to reproduce the issue on the release branch. > > If everything goes well with CI tests by Pedro running till Sunday, I > think > > we should move forward with the release (given that we have enough +1s). > > Is it possible to trigger the CI on the 1.2 branch repeatedly or at a > fixed > > schedule till Sunday? > > > > Anirudh > > > > On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 11:56 AM, Indhu <indhubhara...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > > > > I've been using CUDA build from this branch (built from source) on > Ubuntu > > > for couple of days now and I haven't seen any issue. > > > > > > The flaky tests need to be fixed but this release need not be blocked > for > > > that. > > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 11:32 AM, Haibin Lin <haibin.lin....@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I agree with Anirudh that the focus of the discussion should be > limited > > > to > > > > the release branch, not the master branch. Anything that breaks on > > master > > > > but works on release branch should not block the release itself. > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > > > Haibin > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:58 AM, Pedro Larroy < > > > > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I see your point. > > > > > > > > > > I checked the failures on the v1.2.0 branch and I don't see > > segfaults, > > > > just > > > > > minor failures due to flaky tests. > > > > > > > > > > I will trigger it repeatedly a few times until Sunday to have a and > > > > change > > > > > my vote accordingly. > > > > > > > > > > http://jenkins.mxnet-ci.amazon-ml.com/job/incubator- > > mxnet/job/v1.2.0/ > > > > > http://jenkins.mxnet-ci.amazon-ml.com/blue/organizations/jenkins/ > > > > > incubator-mxnet/detail/v1.2.0/17/pipeline > > > > > http://jenkins.mxnet-ci.amazon-ml.com/blue/organizations/jenkins/ > > > > > incubator-mxnet/detail/v1.2.0/15/pipeline/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pedro. > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 7:16 PM, Anirudh <anirudh2...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Pedro, > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for the suggestions. I will try to reproduce this > without > > > > fixed > > > > > > seeds and also run it for a longer time duration. > > > > > > Having said that, running unit tests over and over for a couple > of > > > days > > > > > > will likely cause > > > > > > problems because there around 42 open issues for flaky tests: > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues?q=is% > > > > > > 3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3AFlaky > > > > > > Also, the release branch has diverged from master around 3 weeks > > back > > > > and > > > > > > it doesn't have many of the changes merged to the master. > > > > > > So, my question essentially is, what will be your benchmark to > > accept > > > > the > > > > > > release ? > > > > > > Is it that we run the test which you provided on 1.2 without > fixed > > > > seeds > > > > > > and for a longer duration without failures ? > > > > > > Or is it that all unit tests should pass over a period of 2 days > > > > without > > > > > > issues. This may require fixing all of the flaky tests which > would > > > > delay > > > > > > the release by considerable amount of time. > > > > > > Or is it something else ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Anirudh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 4:49 AM, Pedro Larroy < > > > > > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Could you remove the fixed seeds and run it for a couple of > hours > > > > with > > > > > an > > > > > > > additional loop? Also I would suggest running the unit tests > > over > > > > and > > > > > > over > > > > > > > for a couple of days if possible. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pedro. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 8:33 PM, Anirudh <anirudh2...@gmail.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Pedro and Naveen, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am unable to reproduce this issue with MKLDNN on the master > > but > > > > not > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > the 1.2.RC2 branch. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Did the following on 1.2.RC2 branch: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > make -j $(nproc) USE_OPENCV=1 USE_BLAS=openblas > > > USE_DIST_KVSTORE=0 > > > > > > > > USE_CUDA=0 USE_CUDNN=0 USE_MKLDNN=1 > > > > > > > > export MXNET_STORAGE_FALLBACK_LOG_VERBOSE=0 > > > > > > > > export MXNET_TEST_SEED=11 > > > > > > > > export MXNET_MODULE_SEED=812478194 > > > > > > > > export MXNET_TEST_COUNT=10000 > > > > > > > > nosetests-2.7 -v tests/python/unittest/test_ > > > > > > > module.py:test_forward_reshape > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Was able to do the 10k runs successfully. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anirudh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 8:46 AM, Anirudh < > anirudh2...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Pedro and Naveen, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is this issue reproducible when MXNet is built with > > > USE_MKLDNN=0? > > > > > > > > > Also, there are a bunch of MKLDNN fixes that didn't go into > > the > > > > > > release > > > > > > > > > branch. Is this issue reproducible on the release branch ? > > > > > > > > > In my opinion, since we have marked MKLDNN as experimental > > > > feature > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > release, if it is confirmed to be a MKLDNN issue > > > > > > > > > we don't need to block the release on it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anirudh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 6:58 AM, Naveen Swamy < > > > mnnav...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Thanks for raising this issue Pedro. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> -1(binding) > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> We were in a similar state for a while a year ago, a lot > of > > > > effort > > > > > > > went > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > >> stabilize the tests and the CI. I have seen the PR builds > > are > > > > > > > > >> non-deterministic and you have to retry over and over > > (wasting > > > > > > > resources > > > > > > > > >> and time) and hope you get lucky. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> Look at the dashboard for master build > > > > > > > > >> http://jenkins.mxnet-ci.amazon-ml.com/job/incubator- > > > > > > mxnet/job/master/ > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> -Naveen > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 5:11 AM, Pedro Larroy < > > > > > > > > >> pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > -1 nondeterminisitc failures on CI master: > > > > > > > > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MXNET-396 > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > Was able to reproduce once in a fresh p3 instance with > > DLAMI > > > > > > can't > > > > > > > > >> > reproduce consistently. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 9:51 PM, Anirudh < > > > > anirudh2...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > As part of RC2 release, we have addressed bugs and > some > > > > > concerns > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > >> > were > > > > > > > > >> > > raised. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > I would like to propose a vote to release Apache MXNet > > > > > > > (incubating) > > > > > > > > >> > version > > > > > > > > >> > > 1.2.0.RC2. Voting will start now (Wednesday, May 2nd) > > and > > > > end > > > > > at > > > > > > > > >> 12:50 PM > > > > > > > > >> > > PDT, Sunday, May 6th. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > Link to release notes: > > > > > > > > >> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/ > > > > > > > > >> > > Apache+MXNet+%28incubating%29+1.2.0+Release+Notes > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > Link to release candidate 1.2.0.rc2: > > > > > > > > >> > > https://github.com/apache/ > incubator-mxnet/releases/tag/ > > > > > > 1.2.0.rc2 > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > Voting results for 1.2.0.rc2: > > > > > > > > >> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ > > > > > > > ebe561c609a8e32351dfe4aafc8876 > > > > > > > > >> > > 199560336472726b58c3455e85@%3Cdev.mxnet.apache.org%3E > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > View this page, click on "Build from Source", and use > > the > > > > > source > > > > > > > > code > > > > > > > > >> > > obtained from 1.2.0.rc2 tag: > > > > > > > > >> > > https://mxnet.incubator.apache.org/install/index.html > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > (Note: The README.md points to the 1.2.0 tag and does > > not > > > > work > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > >> > > moment.) > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > Please remember to test first before voting > accordingly: > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > +1 = approve > > > > > > > > >> > > +0 = no opinion > > > > > > > > >> > > -1 = disapprove (provide reason) > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > Anirudh > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
