Agree.
Recently, we (Tao, Shufan, Pengxin) are trying to integrate the Intel MKL math
functions into mshadow and MXNet.
We have to go through two repos and make lots of tradeoff between them.
If we can move mshadow into MXNet, it will be more flexible to redesign and
refactor parts of legacy c
I think we can make some incremental progress. My thoughts were along the
lines of plugins (thinking about what happens with the VLC project). At
process launch time we could gather some information about our execution
environment (either through configuration, or by convention looking at our
fol
mshadow depends on *a* BLAS library, and there's nothing inherent in mshadow
code base that requires OpenBLAS over MKL. The linked issue #11769 seems to be
more of a build logic issue.
-sz
On 2019/04/07 18:56:43, Aaron Markham wrote:
> +1
> Reduced complexity. Choice of math library... Hopefu
I agree it would make development easier to donate mshadow to mxnet code base,
since mshadow is only used in MXNet. I support donating the mshadow code to
mxnet and I started an RFC for this in mshadow [1].
[1] https://github.com/dmlc/mshadow/issues/373
-sz
On 2019/04/06 04:38:19, Tianqi Chen
While I personally like the idea. This can be something that is fairly
technical challenging and I would caution against this idea vs pushing for
good features and just allow runtime configuration.
The main problem here is due to the C++ ABI. There is no standard c++ ABI
across compilers, which me
Strongly support the idea of runtime loadable components in MXNet. There's
no reason (other than perhaps engineering effort) we can't have a single
compilation of MXNet that finds dependencies and chooses execution paths
intelligently (or based on configuration) at runtime.
On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at
"Does merging mshadow into mxnet bring any actual benefit for customers in
sense of performance, portability, or anything else?"
It would improve the contributor experience in that if we find a bug which
requires fixes in both repos, we won't have to coordinate 2 PRs. It would
also make compilati
+1
Reduced complexity. Choice of math library... Hopefully you can just
install MKL and not be forced into mshadow's dependency on OpenBLAS. This
could make Windows setup easier.
Maybe this issue will get fixed: #11769.
On Sun, Apr 7, 2019, 00:51 Junru Shao wrote:
> Does merging mshadow into mxn
Does merging mshadow into mxnet bring any actual benefit for customers in
sense of performance, portability, or anything else?
On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 9:38 PM Tianqi Chen wrote:
> Technically, mshadow is sufficient for MXNet. Adopting other libraries (
> eigen or xtensor) will unnecessarily incre
