Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Revert the building container back to ubuntu 20.04 #1338

Merged
merged 42 commits into from
Jul 12, 2024

Conversation

LittleLittleCloud
Copy link
Contributor

@LittleLittleCloud LittleLittleCloud commented Jun 25, 2024

unblock dotnet/machinelearning#7182

Need to wait the PR #1351 to be merged in first

Why not reverting back to ubuntu 22.04

The glibcxx in ubuntu 22.04 is 3.4.30 and is newer than the one in centos-streaming9 (3.4.29)

@LittleLittleCloud
Copy link
Contributor Author

@NiklasGustafsson We might still need to revert container back to ubuntu20? Let's still keep this PR open for a while until the ml.net repo side has verified that the libtorch 2.2.1 work with ubuntu 20 | centos 9 helix test machine

@NiklasGustafsson
Copy link
Contributor

@NiklasGustafsson We might still need to revert container back to ubuntu20? Let's still keep this PR open for a while until the ml.net repo side has verified that the libtorch 2.2.1 work with ubuntu 20 | centos 9 helix test machine

@LittleLittleCloud -- still the case?

@LittleLittleCloud
Copy link
Contributor Author

LittleLittleCloud commented Jul 9, 2024

@NiklasGustafsson

Still the case. Just get some time to verify it on centos streaming 9.

Good news is libtorch.so can be loaded on centos 9, bad news is libLibTorchsharp requires a higher glibc version.

So we might still need to convert the building container back (to ubuntu 20.2 this time), or use a lower version glibcxx when compile libtorchsharp, or install a newer glibcxx in helix test machine

image

image

@LittleLittleCloud LittleLittleCloud changed the title Revert the building container back to ubuntu18 Revert the building container back to ubuntu 20.04 Jul 9, 2024
@LittleLittleCloud LittleLittleCloud marked this pull request as ready for review July 9, 2024 20:05
@NiklasGustafsson
Copy link
Contributor

Before publishing to NuGet, we need the built packages tested with ML.NET, so that we're not releasing something that doesn't actually solve the problem.

@LittleLittleCloud
Copy link
Contributor Author

Before publishing to NuGet, we need the built packages tested with ML.NET, so that we're not releasing something that doesn't actually solve the problem.

I have verified the cpu package with mlnet. Where can I verify the cuda package

@NiklasGustafsson
Copy link
Contributor

Before publishing to NuGet, we need the built packages tested with ML.NET, so that we're not releasing something that doesn't actually solve the problem.

I have verified the cpu package with mlnet. Where can I verify the cuda package

You're the one who has a 4090, right? :-)

@LittleLittleCloud
Copy link
Contributor Author

Before publishing to NuGet, we need the built packages tested with ML.NET, so that we're not releasing something that doesn't actually solve the problem.

I have verified the cpu package with mlnet. Where can I verify the cuda package

You're the one who has a 4090, right? :-)

Yes, I also have 1060 and 4050 as well, so a lot of scenarios with GPU I can test with

@michaelgsharp
Copy link
Member

Just curious, how much does the compiler affect the cuda builds?

@NiklasGustafsson
Copy link
Contributor

Just curious, how much does the compiler affect the cuda builds?

It's not the compiler as much as libc that's of concern. Since the CUDA libtorch is a separate distribution, it should be tested, and the build pipeline does not include any GPU machines.

@michaelgsharp
Copy link
Member

@LittleLittleCloud I can show you how to enable the GPU for the big tests we have if you haven't done them before. We have at least 1 big test for each scenario in ML.NET that should fully exercise the gpu. Or at least for the stuff its touching anyways.

@LittleLittleCloud
Copy link
Contributor Author

@michaelgsharp That would be great, I will reach out to you privately

@LittleLittleCloud LittleLittleCloud marked this pull request as draft July 11, 2024 18:47
@LittleLittleCloud LittleLittleCloud marked this pull request as ready for review July 11, 2024 21:21
Directory.Build.props Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
build/BranchInfo.props Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/TorchSharp/Torch.cs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
azure-pipelines.yml Show resolved Hide resolved
@NiklasGustafsson NiklasGustafsson merged commit c332e9d into main Jul 12, 2024
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants