Re: Any interest in ROCm packaging?
Quick update, I've made some new package reviews: ROCm-Device-Libs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2044664 ROCm-CompilerSupport: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2045955 ROCm-Device-Libs is needed to update "rocm-runtime" and for ROCm-CompilerSupport. ROCm-CompilerSupport is needed to allow packaging "ROCclr" which is a common layer used for HIP and OpenCL. Hopefully, that can get the ball rolling a bit. I also have made pull requests to update hsakmt and rocm-runtime (blocked by missing ROCm-Device-Libs package): https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/hsakmt/pull-request/6 https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rocm-runtime/pull-request/7 ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Any interest in ROCm packaging?
Yes, this can't be updated until someone packages ROCM-Device-Libs unfortunately. If anyone volunteers, I'm happy to help review. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Any interest in ROCm packaging?
> Well I think OpenCL would be a good starting point since it's been around for > a while > and lots of applications use it. > > Fedora already has some of the base components already (hsakmt, rocm-runtime, > llvm). For > OCL, fedora would just need: > - ROCm-Device-Libs (bitcode compiled by LLVM, needed to upgrade rocm-runtime > to the latest > version) > - ROCm-CompilerSupport (LLVM plugin, used for runtime compilation) > - ROCclr (a middle layer that does the generic compute work) > - ROCm-OpenCL-Runtime (the opencl frontend for rocclr) Done: https://release-monitoring.org/project/231448/ https://release-monitoring.org/project/231447/ https://release-monitoring.org/project/241725/ https://release-monitoring.org/project/231450/ ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Any interest in ROCm packaging?
> For anyone else wondering: > > https://rocmdocs.amd.com/en/latest/index.html > > AMD ROCm is the first open-source software development platform for > HPC/Hyperscale-class GPU computing. AMD ROCm brings the UNIX > philosophy of choice, minimalism and modular software development to > GPU computing. > > Since the ROCm ecosystem is comprised of open technologies: frameworks > (Tensorflow / PyTorch), libraries (MIOpen / Blas / RCCL), programming > model (HIP), inter-connect (OCD) and up streamed Linux® Kernel support Everything is packaged in that I can see except PyTorch, OCD and "up streamed Linux Kernel support"? > – the platform is continually optimized for performance and > extensibility. Tools, guidance and insights are shared freely across > the ROCm GitHub community and forums. > > Rich. Thoughts? ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Any interest in ROCm packaging?
It would be nice to have the latest version of https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rocm-runtime also. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1877523 ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Any interest in ROCm packaging?
On Thursday, December 16, 2021 6:07:10 PM CET Jeremy Newton wrote: > Full disclosure, I am both a Fedora packager and an employee at AMD. > To be clear, the following is not at all endorsed by my employer; my > interest and use of Fedora is purely a personal hobby and I would like to > keep it that way. > There has been a recent effort to step up Debian packaging of ROCm, and > would like to see if anyone has some interest in expanding the Fedora ROCm > packages. > I see there's a few packages already, and I'm hoping to help with some > internal processes to make ROCm more distro friendly, such as better FHS > compliance, clearer licensing, etc. Anyone interested? I would be happy to > try to help or review package requests :) Hi Jeremy, some time ago I tried to start this. The first step would be to cleanup cmake to actually install them correctly and find the dependencies in the system. I've started with this but for some libraries it worked for other it took ages. See e.g. my PRs here: https://github.com/RadeonOpenCompute/ROCT-Thunk-Interface/pulls? q=is%3Apr+is%3Aclosed With every new release there are other strange defaults like building libraries as static by default: https://github.com/RadeonOpenCompute/ROCT-Thunk-Interface/blob/master/ CMakeLists.txt#L37 So before starting with packaging, cmake should be cleaned up: https://cliutils.gitlab.io/modern-cmake/ ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Any interest in ROCm packaging?
I’m happy, in principle, to help co-maintain ROCm packages. However, before becoming a co-maintainer, I always like to take a look over packages and make sure I’m comfortable with them, i.e.: - I can reconcile them with packaging guidelines - I think I can fix most things that are likely to break - I have any special hardware required to fully test and debug them Do you have a list of the existing ROCm-related packages that you have in mind? – Ben On 12/17/21 13:41, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote: On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 10:37:16AM -0800, Tom Stellard wrote: On 12/16/21 09:07, Jeremy Newton wrote: Full disclosure, I am both a Fedora packager and an employee at AMD. To be clear, the following is not at all endorsed by my employer; my interest and use of Fedora is purely a personal hobby and I would like to keep it that way. There has been a recent effort to step up Debian packaging of ROCm, and would like to see if anyone has some interest in expanding the Fedora ROCm packages. I see there's a few packages already, and I'm hoping to help with some internal processes to make ROCm more distro friendly, such as better FHS compliance, clearer licensing, etc. Anyone interested? I would be happy to try to help or review package requests :) Would you be interested in maintaining the existing packages? I could use some help keeping them up-to-date with the latest versions. I'm also interested in helping package more of ROCm, but ideally everyone interested in this should co-maintain. Best regards, ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Any interest in ROCm packaging?
On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 10:37:16AM -0800, Tom Stellard wrote: > On 12/16/21 09:07, Jeremy Newton wrote: > > Full disclosure, I am both a Fedora packager and an employee at AMD. > > To be clear, the following is not at all endorsed by my employer; my > > interest and use of Fedora is purely a personal hobby and I would like to > > keep it that way. > > > > There has been a recent effort to step up Debian packaging of ROCm, and > > would like to see if anyone has some interest in expanding the Fedora ROCm > > packages. > > > > I see there's a few packages already, and I'm hoping to help with some > > internal processes to make ROCm more distro friendly, such as better FHS > > compliance, clearer licensing, etc. > > Anyone interested? I would be happy to try to help or review package > > requests :) > > Would you be interested in maintaining the existing packages? I could use > some help keeping them up-to-date with the latest versions. > I'm also interested in helping package more of ROCm, but ideally everyone interested in this should co-maintain. Best regards, -- Michel Alexandre Salim profile: https://keyoxide.org/mic...@michel-slm.name signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Any interest in ROCm packaging?
Am 17.12.21 um 02:39 schrieb Jeremy Newton: Well I think OpenCL would be a good starting point since it's been around for a while and lots of applications use it. Also I'd be interested in using pytorch (installed via pip) on my AMD system. Years ago when Tom Stellard started to package rocm things for Fedora I tried to review some of the packages but found it really hard to tweak the sources/build process to produce something acceptable to Fedora. I'd love to see this being improved so I could use my GPU for smaller compute tasks. Felix ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Any interest in ROCm packaging?
> On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 05:07:10PM -, Jeremy Newton wrote: > > I think that'd be awesome -- and those internal clean-ups are really > appreciated. Having the infrastructure there is nice, but I'm also curious: > are there any application-level tools that are in Fedora Linux already or > which could be packaged, to serve as a showcase for the technology? Well I think OpenCL would be a good starting point since it's been around for a while and lots of applications use it. Fedora already has some of the base components already (hsakmt, rocm-runtime, llvm). For OCL, fedora would just need: - ROCm-Device-Libs (bitcode compiled by LLVM, needed to upgrade rocm-runtime to the latest version) - ROCm-CompilerSupport (LLVM plugin, used for runtime compilation) - ROCclr (a middle layer that does the generic compute work) - ROCm-OpenCL-Runtime (the opencl frontend for rocclr) ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Any interest in ROCm packaging?
Yeah I think the technical leads are mostly on board with following FHS as close as possible, which is an obvious plus for Fedora. I think the biggest issue is the scale of the problem, and it almost feel likes they need to work component by component, but [2] will definitely be fixed for all components once they're done assessing everything. I think the thing I've been advocating for is to use GNUInstallDirs [4] as much as possible, which works really well with Fedora's cmake macros and other distro scripts. If you have any other complaints, please let me know, and I can try to advocate for them. Unfortunately I work on the graphics side, so I'm not well versed in the ROCm github and the known issues. [2] https://github.com/RadeonOpenCompute/rocm_smi_lib/issues/84 [4] https://cmake.org/cmake/help/latest/module/GNUInstallDirs.html ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Any interest in ROCm packaging?
For anyone else wondering: https://rocmdocs.amd.com/en/latest/index.html AMD ROCm is the first open-source software development platform for HPC/Hyperscale-class GPU computing. AMD ROCm brings the UNIX philosophy of choice, minimalism and modular software development to GPU computing. Since the ROCm ecosystem is comprised of open technologies: frameworks (Tensorflow / PyTorch), libraries (MIOpen / Blas / RCCL), programming model (HIP), inter-connect (OCD) and up streamed Linux® Kernel support – the platform is continually optimized for performance and extensibility. Tools, guidance and insights are shared freely across the ROCm GitHub community and forums. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com virt-p2v converts physical machines to virtual machines. Boot with a live CD or over the network (PXE) and turn machines into KVM guests. http://libguestfs.org/virt-v2v ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Any interest in ROCm packaging?
On 12/16/21 09:07, Jeremy Newton wrote: Full disclosure, I am both a Fedora packager and an employee at AMD. To be clear, the following is not at all endorsed by my employer; my interest and use of Fedora is purely a personal hobby and I would like to keep it that way. There has been a recent effort to step up Debian packaging of ROCm, and would like to see if anyone has some interest in expanding the Fedora ROCm packages. I see there's a few packages already, and I'm hoping to help with some internal processes to make ROCm more distro friendly, such as better FHS compliance, clearer licensing, etc. Anyone interested? I would be happy to try to help or review package requests :) Would you be interested in maintaining the existing packages? I could use some help keeping them up-to-date with the latest versions. -Tom ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Any interest in ROCm packaging?
I maintain the now-deprecated pure-Python “rocm-smi” package, and I’ve looked a few times at packaging rocm_smi_lib[1] to replace it, but the kinds of distro-friendliness issues you mention, e.g. [2][3], have so far been more than I was willing to work around. I was also partially dissuaded by a general sense (which may or may not be accurate) that the main ROCm project’s issue tracker is dominated on both the filing and the responding side by high-volume end-user support questions, while the individual component projects have mostly technical bug reports but don’t always seem to have anyone reliably looking at them. I’m happy to collaborate on work in this area as I am able, particularly—from a selfish perspective—if it leads to a maintainable rocm_smi_lib without too many downstream hacks, or if it eventually enables GPGPU in Darktable and/or BOINC without proprietary or unpackaged software. I think a lot of people would be *very* excited about that, if it is possible. – Ben Beasley (FAS music) [1] https://github.com/RadeonOpenCompute/rocm_smi_lib/ [2] https://github.com/RadeonOpenCompute/rocm_smi_lib/issues/84 [3] https://github.com/RadeonOpenCompute/rocm_smi_lib/issues/83 On 12/16/21 12:07, Jeremy Newton wrote: Full disclosure, I am both a Fedora packager and an employee at AMD. To be clear, the following is not at all endorsed by my employer; my interest and use of Fedora is purely a personal hobby and I would like to keep it that way. There has been a recent effort to step up Debian packaging of ROCm, and would like to see if anyone has some interest in expanding the Fedora ROCm packages. I see there's a few packages already, and I'm hoping to help with some internal processes to make ROCm more distro friendly, such as better FHS compliance, clearer licensing, etc. Anyone interested? I would be happy to try to help or review package requests :) ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Any interest in ROCm packaging?
On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 05:07:10PM -, Jeremy Newton wrote: > I see there's a few packages already, and I'm hoping to help with some > internal processes to make ROCm more distro friendly, such as better FHS > compliance, clearer licensing, etc. > > Anyone interested? I would be happy to try to help or review package requests > :) I think that'd be awesome -- and those internal clean-ups are really appreciated. Having the infrastructure there is nice, but I'm also curious: are there any application-level tools that are in Fedora Linux already or which could be packaged, to serve as a showcase for the technology? -- Matthew Miller Fedora Project Leader ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Any interest in ROCm packaging?
Full disclosure, I am both a Fedora packager and an employee at AMD. To be clear, the following is not at all endorsed by my employer; my interest and use of Fedora is purely a personal hobby and I would like to keep it that way. There has been a recent effort to step up Debian packaging of ROCm, and would like to see if anyone has some interest in expanding the Fedora ROCm packages. I see there's a few packages already, and I'm hoping to help with some internal processes to make ROCm more distro friendly, such as better FHS compliance, clearer licensing, etc. Anyone interested? I would be happy to try to help or review package requests :) ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
