[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ROCm bump to 5.7 - rocm-smi-lib SOVERSIONs bump



Thanks Mo for your review,

M. Zhou, on 2023-09-17:
> I'm reviewing the updates for rocm-smi-lib 5.7.0 in git and figured
> out a issue. I'll first briefly write it down here and push the fix
> later.

Acknowledged, I have some further changes staged for push to the
repository for information, nothing outstanding: some fixups and
some d/copyright review.  I'll fetch your fixes to make sure I'm
not duplicating too much work.

> The patch contains an old copy of rsmiBinding.py. Probably due to
> python import path reasons.
> 0001-Merged-python-rsmi-bindings-into-the-main-file.patch
> 
> It is outdated. Since the latest version of the rsmiBinding.py
> file has been converted into a cmake template, involving placeholders
> like @VERSION_MAJOR@. We should no longer include the 0001-* patch,
> as its contents are already outdated.
> 
> For instance, take a look at the structure rsmi_status_t. The latest
> version of the .in file contains status definition for 0x13, but the
> oudated patch does not.
> 
> My proposed fix is to simply remove the 0001-* patch, and move
> the rsmiBinding.py to the standard python library path
> /usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/
> So the `from rsmiBindings import *` will work.
> Working on this now.
> 
> Incorporating a moving target into a batch is prone to be oudated.

Indeed, I had some weird bugs when attempting to run rocm-smi in
a controlled environment, and dropping upfront the following
patches per your recommendation solved the issue:

  * 0001-Merged-python-rsmi-bindings-into-the-main-file.patch
  * 0002-use-soversioned-library.patch
  * 0005-dotdot.patch

Now fetching your changes to incorporate the lot.

Have a nice day,  :)
-- 
Étienne Mollier <emollier@emlwks999.eu>
Fingerprint:  8f91 b227 c7d6 f2b1 948c  8236 793c f67e 8f0d 11da
Sent from /dev/pts/1, please excuse my verbosity.
On air: Space Avenue - The Odyssey

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: