Thanks for the thoughts Bhavin, supporting the latest release would also be an option, and it would be easier from a support point of view.
"2) I think your question probably is what should be tested by the Apache MXNet CI and NOT what is supported by Apache MXNet, correct?" I view these two things as being closely related, if not equivalent. If we don't run at least basic tests of old versions of CUDA I think there will be issues that slip through. That being said we can rely on users to report these issues, and chances are we'll be able to provide backwards compatible patches. At a minimum I'd recommend we should run tests on all supported CUDA versions before a release. -Kellen On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 5:05 PM, Bhavin Thaker <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Kellen, > > 1) Does Apache MXNet (Incubating) have a support matrix? I think the answer > is no, because I don’t know of where it is documented. One of the mentors > told me earlier that the community uses and modifies the open-source > project as per their individual requirements or those of the community. As > far as I know, there is no single entity that is responsible for supporting > something in MXNet — corrections to my understanding are welcome. > > 2) I think your question probably is what should be tested by the Apache > MXNet CI and NOT what is supported by Apache MXNet, correct? > > If yes, I propose testing only the latest CUDA9 and the respective latest > cuDNN version in the MXNet CI since CUDA9 is backward compatible with > earlier Nvidia hardware generations. > > I would like to hear reasons why this would not work. > > I have commented on the github issue as well: > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/8805 > > Bhavin Thaker. > > On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 3:30 AM kellen sunderland < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > Hello all, I'd like to propose that we nail down exactly which versions > of > > CUDA we're supporting. We can then ensure that we've got good test > > coverage for those specific versions in CI. At the moment it's ambiguous > > what our current policy is. I.e. when do we drop support for old > > versions? As a result we potentially cut a release promising to support > a > > certain version of CUDA, then retroactively drop support after we find an > > issue. > > > > I'd like to propose that we officially support N, and N-1 versions of > CUDA, > > where N is the most recent major version release. In addition we can do > > our best to support libraries that are available for download for those > > versions. Supporting these CUDA versions would also dictate which > hardware > > we support in terms of compute capability (of course resource constraints > > would also play some role in our ability to support some hardware). > > > > As an example this would mean that currently we'd officially support CUDA > > 9.* and 8. This would imply we support CUDNN 5.1 through 7, as those > > libraries are available for CUDA 8, and 9. It would also mean we support > > 3.0-7.x (Kepler, Maxwell, Pascal, Volta) taking the more restrictive > > hardware requirements of CUDA 9 into account. > > > > What do you all think? Would this be a reasonable support strategy? Are > > these the versions you'd like to see covered in CI? > > > > -Kellen > > > > A relevant issue: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/8805 > > >
