-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 60
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
Refactoring common aarch64
& x86_64
items in dependencies.yaml
#585
Comments
Note this requires work in |
I don't know if there's a clear action item here. We've discussed some possible new features for |
The alternative I would suggest is replacing the existing matrix with two separate matrices as shown below to separate things that are dependent on arch and CUDA version from those dependent only on CUDA version. However, this doesn't reduce the lines of code, so I am not a strong proponent of this. Current state: - output_types: conda
matrices:
- matrix:
arch: x86_64
cuda: "11.8"
packages:
- cuda-version=11.8
- nvcc_linux-64=11.8
- libcufile=1.4.0.31
- libcufile-dev=1.4.0.31
- libnvjpeg=11.6.0.55
- libnvjpeg-dev=11.6.0.55
- matrix:
arch: aarch64
cuda: "11.8"
packages:
- cuda-version=11.8
- nvcc_linux-aarch64=11.8
- libnvjpeg=11.6.0.55
- libnvjpeg-dev=11.6.0.55
- matrix:
cuda: "12.0"
packages:
- cuda-version=12.0
- cuda-nvcc
- libcufile-dev
- libnvjpeg-dev
- libnvjpeg-static Proposed change: - output_types: conda
matrices:
- matrix:
cuda: "11.8"
packages:
- cuda-version=11.8
- libnvjpeg=11.6.0.55
- libnvjpeg-dev=11.6.0.55
- matrix:
cuda: "12.0"
packages:
- cuda-version=12.0
- libnvjpeg-dev
- libnvjpeg-static
- output_types: conda
matrices:
- matrix:
arch: x86_64
cuda: "11.8"
packages:
- nvcc_linux-64=11.8
- libcufile=1.4.0.31
- libcufile-dev=1.4.0.31
- matrix:
arch: aarch64
cuda: "11.8"
packages:
- nvcc_linux-aarch64=11.8
- matrix:
cuda: "12.0"
packages:
- cuda-nvcc
- libcufile-dev |
Think that was what Vyas was proposing. In any event think he tried this and it didn't work IIUC, but maybe there's something else we are missing. Feel free to give it a go 🙂 |
Bradley is correct, what I was originally proposing is partially matching multiple matrices and I don't think we actually plan to implement that. I did consider doing what Bradley's example does, but I decided against it since (as he noted) it doesn't really shorten much. It is technically more DRY, but not enough to be worth the change IMO. I think we can close this issue. The next time these requirement lists change again we can take a look and see if there are other opportunities to improve the lists. |
Ok sounds good. Thanks you both! 🙏 |
Filing an issue to track this suggestion from @vyasr
#572 (comment)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: