+1 Kellen made a good call about watching out for the license. Not an issue for MKL-DNN though, which I believe has an Apache 2 license.
On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 3:51 PM Zhao, Patric <patric.z...@intel.com> wrote: > +1 for static link :) > > Feel free to let us know if anything we can help. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: kellen sunderland [mailto:kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com] > > Sent: Friday, November 9, 2018 7:30 AM > > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org > > Cc: d...@mxnet.apache.org > > Subject: Re: MKLDNN dynamically linked > > > > I think we should bias towards static linking. It should make using > mxnet > > easier in a lot of cases for users. As long as the license permits > static linking > > (i.e. is non-gpl) I'd +1 static linking for portability and ease of > use. The only > > caveat would be in cases where the package size would cause grief for > PyPi > > maintainers. > > > > On Thu, Nov 8, 2018, 3:54 PM Sheng Zha <zhash...@apache.org wrote: > > > > > +1. Ideally, MKLDNN can be statically linked. mxnet-mkl relies on Make > > > +for > > > building it so help is wanted on mxnet. > > > > > > -sz > > > > > > On 2018/11/08 21:28:50, Alex Zai <aza...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Currently in mxnet-mkl the libmxnet.so is dynamically linked to to > > > > libmkldnn.so.0. This is known to cause some issues if the wrong > > > > version > > > of > > > > mkldnn is linked. Can we static link this file instead? > > > > > > > > Alex > > > > > > > >
