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

Move GPU CI pipelines from old daint to new daint #1239

Draft
wants to merge 15 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

msimberg
Copy link
Contributor

@msimberg msimberg commented Sep 10, 2024

No description provided.

@msimberg msimberg added this to the 0.29.0 milestone Sep 10, 2024
@msimberg msimberg self-assigned this Sep 10, 2024
Copy link

codacy-production bot commented Sep 10, 2024

Coverage summary from Codacy

See diff coverage on Codacy

Coverage variation Diff coverage
-0.05% (target: -1.00%) (target: 90.00%)
Coverage variation details
Coverable lines Covered lines Coverage
Common ancestor commit (aa6ef39) 18217 13769 75.58%
Head commit (fe405f0) 18217 (+0) 13760 (-9) 75.53% (-0.05%)

Coverage variation is the difference between the coverage for the head and common ancestor commits of the pull request branch: <coverage of head commit> - <coverage of common ancestor commit>

Diff coverage details
Coverable lines Covered lines Diff coverage
Pull request (#1239) 0 0 ∅ (not applicable)

Diff coverage is the percentage of lines that are covered by tests out of the coverable lines that the pull request added or modified: <covered lines added or modified>/<coverable lines added or modified> * 100%

See your quality gate settings    Change summary preferences

Codacy stopped sending the deprecated coverage status on June 5th, 2024. Learn more

Copy link
Contributor

@aurianer aurianer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks a lot!

.gitlab/includes/clang14_cuda11_pipeline.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@msimberg msimberg force-pushed the cuda-pipelines-gh200 branch 2 times, most recently from a72b2f8 to 2798c26 Compare September 11, 2024 14:01
@@ -9,3 +9,6 @@ include:
- local: '.gitlab/includes/clang14_cuda11_pipeline.yml'
- local: '.gitlab/includes/gcc12_hip6_pipeline.yml'
- local: '.gitlab/includes/sloc.yml'
# TODO: move to on_merge before merging
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

To do.

@msimberg
Copy link
Contributor Author

msimberg commented Sep 11, 2024

Exporting NVIDIA_VISIBLE_DEVICES=all and NVIDIA_DRIVER_CAPABILITIES="compute,utility" seems to be what was required to get the container images to load the correct drivers etc. and avoid

cudaErrorInsufficientDriver (CUDA driver version is insufficient for CUDA runtime version)

These are from https://docs.nvidia.com/datacenter/cloud-native/container-toolkit/latest/docker-specialized.html#constraints.

These work when testing manually, but don't seem to be work in CI yet.

@msimberg
Copy link
Contributor Author

All right, we're making some progress:

  • The GCC 12/CUDA 12 pipeline is working now.
  • The clang/cuda one isn't working because it uses valgrind and valgrind doesn't seem to like some of the instructions used. I'll see if using a less specific arm instruction set may help valgrind here.
  • The CUDA 11 pipeline isn't working. I would've expected it to be compatible despite the old CUDA version. I'll see if changing required driver versions etc. helps at all.

I may end up disabling the test steps for the latter two in this PR to reenable them in separate PRs.

@msimberg msimberg force-pushed the cuda-pipelines-gh200 branch from 0dea610 to bd072ec Compare September 17, 2024 09:52
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ include:
- local: '.gitlab/includes/common_pipeline.yml'
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Remove pipeline?

@msimberg
Copy link
Contributor Author

The clang/cuda configuration with valgrind no longer complains about illegal instructions: good. It now reports many issues, which I don't know yet if they're real or not.

I'll aim to get the GCC 12/CUDA 12 pipeline running properly (still some tweaks needed on the CSCS CI side apparently) and then I'll attempt to revive the two other CUDA configurations separately, possibly introducing another valgrind configuration on x86.

@msimberg msimberg removed this from the 0.29.0 milestone Sep 30, 2024
@msimberg msimberg force-pushed the cuda-pipelines-gh200 branch 3 times, most recently from 214b45e to 286b0c5 Compare November 14, 2024 12:10
@msimberg msimberg force-pushed the cuda-pipelines-gh200 branch from 286b0c5 to 7541a28 Compare November 25, 2024 10:08
@msimberg msimberg force-pushed the cuda-pipelines-gh200 branch from 9a982e3 to 559c234 Compare December 6, 2024 10:08
@msimberg msimberg force-pushed the cuda-pipelines-gh200 branch 4 times, most recently from d474e3e to 178bad0 Compare December 9, 2024 16:24
@msimberg msimberg force-pushed the cuda-pipelines-gh200 branch 4 times, most recently from 0bbf943 to 88e86d8 Compare December 20, 2024 19:51
@msimberg msimberg force-pushed the cuda-pipelines-gh200 branch from 88e86d8 to fe405f0 Compare January 6, 2025 10:03
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: In Progress
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants