Re: Maintaining rocm-device-libs and rocm-comgr

[Christian Kastner <ckk@debian.org>]

Hi Jeremy,

On 2023-03-03 04:53, Jeremy Newton wrote:
> I just wanted to bring some attention to this issue:
> https://github.com/RadeonOpenCompute/ROCm/issues/1904
> <https://github.com/RadeonOpenCompute/ROCm/issues/1904>
> 
> Since rocm-device-libs and rocm-comgr are a bit hard to maintain for
> building against stable LLVM, I'm going to experiment with forking and
> branching these components myself to target stable LLVM releases. Feel
> free to contribute if you're interested:
> https://github.com/Mystro256/ROCm-CompilerSupport/branches
> <https://github.com/Mystro256/ROCm-CompilerSupport/branches>
> https://github.com/Mystro256/ROCm-Device-Libs/branches
> <https://github.com/Mystro256/ROCm-Device-Libs/branches>
> 
> My plan is to tag an initial release (using '.0') when an LLVM branch is
> created upstream, then every ROCm release, I'll gather any applicable
> fixes from the that release (or pull any requests I may get), then retag.
> 
> I just tagged everything I have now:
> https://github.com/Mystro256/ROCm-Device-Libs/releases
> <https://github.com/Mystro256/ROCm-Device-Libs/releases>
> https://github.com/Mystro256/ROCm-CompilerSupport/releases
> <https://github.com/Mystro256/ROCm-CompilerSupport/releases>
> 
> You might see some fixes that aren't upstream but applicable for use in
> upstream LLVM only. Feel free to try it with Debian if you find it useful.

I think that's a great idea. Unless we want to vendor, stable LLVM is
all that we have.

For us downstream, we could either switch to use your releases as
source, or (I think cleaner) stick with the upstream source and
incorporate the patches that are accumulated into the Debian package itself.

Best,
Christian