Skip to content

[SYCL][Docs] Mark host as deprecated in SYCL_DEVICE_FILTER #7117

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

Conversation

steffenlarsen
Copy link
Contributor

The host device has been removed and related APIs have been deprecated. This includes the host device-type and backend in SYCL_DEVICE_FILTER. This commit changes the documentation for SYCL_DEVICE_FILTER to mention the deprecation of host in the filter and remove any mention of the behavior of using the deprecated values and interfaces.

The host device has been removed and related APIs have been deprecated.
This includes the `host` device-type and backend in
`SYCL_DEVICE_FILTER`. This commit changes the documentation for
`SYCL_DEVICE_FILTER` to mention the deprecation of `host` in the filter
and remove any mention of the behavior of using the deprecated
values and interfaces.

Signed-off-by: Larsen, Steffen <[email protected]>
@steffenlarsen steffenlarsen requested a review from a team as a code owner October 19, 2022 14:21
Copy link
Contributor

@bader bader left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The host device has been removed and related APIs have been deprecated.

Hm... I see host device been used in CI quite extensively - https://github.com/intel/llvm/blob/sycl/devops/test_configs.json. Shouldn't we update configuration for llvm-test-suite and CTS here too?

@steffenlarsen
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hm... I see host device been used in CI quite extensively - https://github.com/intel/llvm/blob/sycl/devops/test_configs.json. Shouldn't we update configuration for llvm-test-suite and CTS here too?

#7160 removes the use of host you pointed out. To my knowledge the llvm-test-suite should have been updated, though intel/llvm-test-suite#1345 removes some left-over mentions of it in the READMEs. CTS I am unsure about.

@bader
Copy link
Contributor

bader commented Oct 24, 2022

AFAIK, some of the tests in CTS or llvm-test-suite require at least two devices.

@pvchupin
Copy link
Contributor

Testing of #7160 is clean though... I guess we can merge and see where it breaks next, unless anybody has any better suggestions where to look.

@bader
Copy link
Contributor

bader commented Oct 25, 2022

My wild guess is that the test requiring two devices is skipped if only one device is available.
Anyway, I merged #7160.

@steffenlarsen
Copy link
Contributor Author

My wild guess is that the test requiring two devices is skipped if only one device is available.

I believe you're right. Without host device we don't have many other choices, except maybe trying to use sub-devices, but I am not sure that would be very representative for such tests.

@pvchupin
Copy link
Contributor

If we don't have any scenario where these tests are going to be executed, does it make sense to have these tests in the testbase?
They may fail in random local runs, but being not tested anywhere. That could be confusing.
Maybe we should be moving these in a separate folder at least?

@steffenlarsen
Copy link
Contributor Author

It really depends on whether or not we ever test with systems that have multiple devices. If we don't then we may indeed run into cases where the tests were broken without us knowing. I don't know if there is much benefit in moving the few of these tests we have into a separate folder. In general I would expect the tests to have their multi-device nature stated as part of their names.

@pvchupin
Copy link
Contributor

@steffenlarsen, can you check post-commit fail? https://github.com/intel/llvm/actions/runs/3318840937/jobs/5483251069
It seems it started after #7160 merge, not sure why it's observed on Windows only.

@pvchupin
Copy link
Contributor

It really depends on whether or not we ever test with systems that have multiple devices.

I believe all our GPU systems should be capable of offloading to CPU. Does it make sense to modify these few tests to use GPU and CPU device?

@steffenlarsen
Copy link
Contributor Author

steffenlarsen commented Oct 25, 2022

@steffenlarsen, can you check post-commit fail? https://github.com/intel/llvm/actions/runs/3318840937/jobs/5483251069 It seems it started after #7160 merge, not sure why it's observed on Windows only.

Actual offender is #7113. It seems to be flaky so if we need to we can revert it, but I am hoping #7154 will fix the issue.

@pvchupin pvchupin merged commit dcbed11 into intel:sycl Oct 25, 2022
@pvchupin
Copy link
Contributor

@steffenlarsen, can you check post-commit fail? https://github.com/intel/llvm/actions/runs/3318840937/jobs/5483251069 It seems it started after #7160 merge, not sure why it's observed on Windows only.

Actual offender is #7113. It seems to be flaky so if we need to we can revert it, but I am hoping #7154 will fix the issue.

@steffenlarsen, looks like it keeps failing occasionally.

@steffenlarsen
Copy link
Contributor Author

@steffenlarsen, looks like it keeps failing occasionally.

Sadly it seems that way. I am investigating in will revert if necessary.

@pvchupin
Copy link
Contributor

@steffenlarsen, any update on flaky issue?

@steffenlarsen
Copy link
Contributor Author

@steffenlarsen, any update on flaky issue?

I have not yet had any luck reproducing it locally. It may help to add a small patch giving more context to the failure if reproducing it continues to be a problem.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants