Re: Joining ROCm team, ectrans
On 2024-10-20 05:28, Cordell Bloor wrote:
> Perhaps DEB_HOST_HIP_ARCHITECTURES? That's a mashup between Debian's
> naming conventions and the CMAKE_HIP_ARCHITECTURES variable [1]. IDK.
> Naming things is hard.
I like the _HIP_ARCHITECTURES but I'm not yet confident with DEB_HOST.
I don't see a problem with adding to the DEB_ namespace, but I can
imagine a scenario where other teams might see it. I'd feel more
comfortable asking debian-devel if this is ok.
HOST is semantically correct but do we need this distinction: we'll
never have BUILD or TARGET alternatives.
I've created a discussion page [2] on the wiki. I don't mean to make
such a big deal out of this, but this file will have archive-wide
effects and I'd like to get it right from the beginning.
> In any case, this might also be good for GitLab runners. The ROCm
> packages take a long time to build, in part because they must be built
> for many GPU architectures in serial. It might be good to have a
> mechanism to reduce the target architecture set to a single GPU for
> running a quick check on the package.
Oh, good idea!
> AMD has asked if Debian could use any GitLab Runners with GPUs. I think
> those would be useful—particularly if the runners had server GPUs rarely
> found in packager workstations—but I think we'd need to optimize our
> usage before taking them up on that.
Agreed.
Best,
Christian
> [1]: https://cmake.org/cmake/help/latest/variable/CMAKE_HIP_ARCHITECTURES.html>
[2]: https://salsa.debian.org/rocm-team/community/team-project/-/wikis/Makefile-for-package-maintainers
Reply to: