For GPU, we don't run any tests in parallel. -Marco
Naveen Swamy <[email protected]> schrieb am Do., 4. Okt. 2018, 19:54: > Looking at the error raised, you can see that the workspace size(GPU mem > size) of 1GB isn't sufficient. I am wondering if it is due to tests running > in parallel on CI, if this is true(tests running in parallel) is it > possible to reduce the parallelism ? > Error: > "mxnet.base.MXNetError: [05:40:12] > src/operator/nn/./cudnn/cudnn_convolution-inl.h:870: Failed to find any > forward convolution algorithm. with workspace size of 1073741824 bytes, > please consider reducing batch/model size or increasing the workspace size" > > I ran a similar test(test_slice_batchnorm) for 5K times and I couldn't > reproduce the issue. I will look into it further to see if there are other > alternatives. > > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 10:48 AM Piyush Ghai <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Another build where test_slice_batchnorm_reshape_batchnorm fails : > > > > > http://jenkins.mxnet-ci.amazon-ml.com/blue/organizations/jenkins/incubator-mxnet/detail/PR-12721/7/pipeline > > < > > > http://jenkins.mxnet-ci.amazon-ml.com/blue/organizations/jenkins/incubator-mxnet/detail/PR-12721/7/pipeline > > > > > > > — > > Piyush > > > > > On Oct 3, 2018, at 9:32 AM, Pedro Larroy <[email protected] > > > > wrote: > > > > > > Seems is not the only test: > > > > > > http://jenkins.mxnet-ci.amazon-ml.com/blue/organizations/jenkins/incubator-mxnet/detail/PR-12726/5/pipeline > > > > > > test_slice_batchnorm_reshape_batchnorm is also failing and hasn't been > > > touched for a while. It doesn't look like a problem with the test to > me, > > > (not a flaky test). Looks to me that should find and address the root > > cause > > > instead of disabling the test in this case. > > > > > > Pedro. > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 2:39 AM Marco de Abreu > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> I have created an issue at > > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/12715 and a PR to > > disable > > >> the test at https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12716. > > >> > > >> This test is pretty new and was submitted with a number of other > > >> problematic (and disabled) tests: > > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/11164 It could be > > >> possible > > >> that the test is simply not stable enough. The PR that introduced that > > test > > >> is https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/10921 - it was > merged > > >> two > > >> days ago. > > >> > > >> Best regards, > > >> Marco > > >> > > >> On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 8:43 AM Pedro Larroy < > > [email protected]> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >>> Thanks for checking Lin. If it happens again we will have to dig > > deeper. > > >> We > > >>> have just one executor in GPU so I wonder what could be the root > cause > > of > > >>> this. > > >>> > > >>> On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 10:57 PM Lin Yuan <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> I could not reproduce the error on an EC2 g3x8 instance making it > hard > > >> to > > >>>> debug. I also suspect it was due to resource usage limit on ci > > >>> Instance. > > >>>> > > >>>> On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 10:40 PM Pedro Larroy < > > >>> [email protected] > > >>>>> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> It doesn't look like flakiness to me at first sight. I think it > might > > >>> be > > >>>>> related to resource usage / allocation / leak in the worst case. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Could be that there was not enough memory GPU memory at the time of > > >>> test > > >>>>> execution. But I'm just speculating, hence my original question. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Pedro. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 8:16 PM Lin Yuan <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> Hi Pedro, > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> I also got this failure in my PR > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >> > > > http://jenkins.mxnet-ci.amazon-ml.com/blue/organizations/jenkins/incubator-mxnet/detail/PR-11742/27/pipeline > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> I was not able to identify the root cause of it from changelist. > > >> Are > > >>>> you > > >>>>>> suggesting there is some flakiness in the master branch too? > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Thanks, > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Lin > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 4:55 PM Pedro Larroy < > > >>>>> [email protected]> > > >>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Hi > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> I saw this failure on CI: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >> > > > http://jenkins.mxnet-ci.amazon-ml.com/blue/organizations/jenkins/incubator-mxnet/detail/master/1697/pipeline > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Have you seen other cases where we fail to select the best CUDNN > > >>>>>> algorithm? > > >>>>>>> In which circumstances this could happen, and do you think is a > > >>> good > > >>>>> idea > > >>>>>>> to have one selected by default as a last resort? > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Pedro. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >> > > > > >
