Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.4.1.rc0

2019-05-06 Thread kellen sunderland
L: lib > /home/lvtao/Workspace/mxnet-official/build/mklml/mklml_lnx_2019.0.1.20180928/lib/libmklml_intel.so > > Thank you Junru for managing this release. We also verified MKL-DNN > related tests, convergence, quantization and FP32/INT8 performance. They > all look good to me. >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.4.1.rc0

2019-05-05 Thread kellen sunderland
t; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_parser.cc.o > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Re: [VOTE] add conan support for Apache MXNet (incubating)

2019-05-03 Thread kellen sunderland
out issues and concerns, > rather than broken links to nonsense. > > Looking forward to your reply! > > Thanks, > Junru > > On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 08:05 kellen sunderland < > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hey Konstantin. Thanks for startin

Re: [VOTE] add conan support for Apache MXNet (incubating)

2019-05-03 Thread kellen sunderland
Hey Konstantin. Thanks for starting an email thread and sorry for the confusion. I think the ides is that we should discuss and agree on Conan.io adoption first on the dev list, then start merging PRs. Release 1.4.1 is already in testing and the 1.5 code freeze deadline is also near so I think

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.4.1.rc0

2019-05-03 Thread kellen sunderland
non-binding distinction. I am not a PPMC > member, so my vote is non-binding. > > Best, > Damien > > On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 3:19 AM kellen sunderland < > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi Junru could you give a quick summary of the binding / non-bi

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.4.1.rc0

2019-05-03 Thread kellen sunderland
riate for me to vote so > I refrained from voting till now. > > +1 > > -sz > > > On May 3, 2019, at 12:19 AM, kellen sunderland < > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi Junru could you give a quick summary of the binding / non-binding >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.4.1.rc0

2019-05-03 Thread kellen sunderland
passed > > > - GluonCV unittest scripts passed > > > - GluonCV training scripts passed > > > - No issue with python multiprocessing > > > > > > Best, > > > Zhi > > > > On May 2, 2019, at 11:34 AM, kellen sunderland < > > > kellen.sunderl

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.4.1.rc0

2019-05-02 Thread kellen sunderland
+1 (non-binding) I checked TRT integration builds and tests pass. MD5s Sigs look good. -Kellen On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 10:51 AM Damien Stanton wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Built from source / Scala / Clojure. All tests pass. The only issue of > minor note: The macOS build guide indicates a

Re: [Announcement] New Committer - Wang Jiajun

2019-04-16 Thread kellen sunderland
Welcome! Very impressed with the work fixing memory leaks so far. On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 9:14 AM Carin Meier wrote: > Congrats! > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 11:58 AM Anirudh Subramanian < > anirudh2...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Please join me to welcome Wang Jiajun

Re: CUDNN 7.5 Issues

2019-04-09 Thread kellen sunderland
Hey Per, just wanted to drop a line and say thanks for supporting the community on this one. On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 4:20 AM Per da Silva wrote: > I've created an issue to track this problem: > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/14652 > > On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 9:07 AM Per da Silva

Re: [MXNET 2.0 Wishlist] [DISCUSS] Backend choices during runtime

2019-04-07 Thread kellen sunderland
rden and technical debts without significant > benefit. I would suggest starting by supporting something simple like a > plugin module, before moving toward the general direction. > > Tianqi > > On Sun, Apr 7, 2019 at 1:31 PM kellen sunderland < > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.co

Re: [MXNET 2.0 Wishlist] [DISCUSS] Backend choices during runtime

2019-04-07 Thread kellen sunderland
Strongly support the idea of runtime loadable components in MXNet. There's no reason (other than perhaps engineering effort) we can't have a single compilation of MXNet that finds dependencies and chooses execution paths intelligently (or based on configuration) at runtime. On Thu, Apr 4, 2019

Re: assimilation of mshadow into the MXNet codebase

2019-04-07 Thread kellen sunderland
"Does merging mshadow into mxnet bring any actual benefit for customers in sense of performance, portability, or anything else?" It would improve the contributor experience in that if we find a bug which requires fixes in both repos, we won't have to coordinate 2 PRs. It would also make

[MXNET 2.0 Wishlist] [DISCUSS] Single build system

2019-04-04 Thread Kellen Sunderland
Hello MXNet devs, I'd like to start a thread discussing what our build system should look like in MXNet 2.0. I'd propose that although the current make system has served us well in the past, we remove it along with the bump to 2.0. The end goal I'd like to see is that we have a clean build

Re: Discussing plans for next MXNet releases

2019-04-02 Thread kellen sunderland
Release breakdown makes sense to me Hagay. Thanks for initiating a discussion. Some features that I'm personally looking forward to that I hope can make it into 1.5 (schedule permitting): * TensorRT being integrated with the subgraph API * VNNI MKLDNN support * AMP training in MXNet I like

Re: R help

2019-03-25 Thread kellen sunderland
Is this the error? "test_model.R:129: error: Fine-tune cannot open URL 'http://data.dmlc.ml/models/imagenet/inception-bn/Inception-BN-0126.params' 1: GetInception() at R-package/tests/testthat/test_model.R:129 2:

Re: [Announcement] New Committer - Patric Zhao

2019-03-20 Thread kellen sunderland
Congrats Patric! On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 10:34 PM Hagay Lupesko wrote: > Congrats Patric! > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 7:49 AM Joshua Z. Zhang > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Congrats Patrick! > > > > > > > > > > > > Zhi > > > > > > > > On Mar 15, 2019 at 10:46 PM, > marco.g.ab...@gmail.com)>

Re: [Announcement] New Committer -- Steffen Rochel

2019-02-04 Thread kellen sunderland
Great news. Congrats Steffen. On Mon, Feb 4, 2019, 5:29 PM Thomas DELTEIL Welcome Steffen! > > On Mon, Feb 4, 2019, 15:55 Marco de Abreu > > Welcome! > > > > Am Di., 5. Feb. 2019, 00:45 hat Chris Olivier > > geschrieben: > > > > > Dear Community: > > > > > > Please join me to welcome Steffen

Re: [Announcement] New Committer -- Lin Yuan

2019-02-02 Thread kellen sunderland
Congrats Lin! Well deserved. On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 11:05 PM Marco de Abreu wrote: > Congratulations, welcome! > > Am So., 3. Feb. 2019, 04:04 hat Chaitanya Bapat > geschrieben: > > > Congratulations Lin! Way to go! > > > > On Sat, 2 Feb 2019 at 19:39, sandeep krishnamurthy < > >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.4.0.rc2

2019-01-31 Thread kellen sunderland
; > gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the > owner. > > Primary key fingerprint: BD52 136E 76B7 BD68 E784 3B0B 591C 0666 9F74 0FD7 > > > Best, > Steffen > > On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 10:39 PM kellen sunderland < > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.c

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.4.0.rc2

2019-01-30 Thread kellen sunderland
+0 Overall release looks good. Probably something I'm doing wrong, but so far not able to validate the .asc. I'm getting "Can't check signature: No public key". I've added the keys from GitHub and the release folder, and also added your public key "40C9346904DFCE37" from the MIT key server

Re: Rust Client Lib

2019-01-29 Thread kellen sunderland
Great response Carin. Just wanted to chime in and say, while the amount of work shouldn't be underestimated to maintain a new language binding, I'd love to see some Rust support. The interop patterns between Rust and C/C++ in particular could make propagating errors a little nicer of an

Re: [DISCUSS] Current Publish problems

2019-01-23 Thread kellen sunderland
Hey Qing, thanks for the summary and to everyone for automating the deployment process. I've left a few comments on the doc. On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 11:46 AM Qing Lan wrote: > Hi all, > > Recently Zach announced the availability for MXNet Maven publishing > pipeline and general static-build

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

2019-01-21 Thread kellen sunderland
t; -Original Message- > From: kellen sunderland [mailto:kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, January 21, 2019 7:34 AM > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status > > Hey Steffen, thanks for allowing a little extra time to merge PRs

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

2019-01-20 Thread kellen sunderland
gt; merge today. > > > > Yuxi asked offline to merge > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13922 to complete Horovod > > integration. PR will be merged today. > > > > After above PR are merge and CI passed successfully 1.4.0.rc1 will be > &g

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

2019-01-16 Thread kellen sunderland
sky PR and can > get to a stable and tested build by Friday. > > Best, > Steffen > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 9:48 PM kellen sunderland < > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Many thanks for the license fixes and allowing some other PRs to come > into >

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

2019-01-15 Thread kellen sunderland
Regards, > > > Steffen > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 11:28 AM Qing Lan wrote: > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > I added a section F in the document that explained the current > > > > static-linked dependencie

Re: Cherry pick bug fix from master branch to v1.4.x

2019-01-15 Thread kellen sunderland
We may want to consider having a new code freeze deadline for RC1. We could allow users to open PRs against the 1.4.x branch up until this deadline. One advantage is we can have a second look at some API changes which we may not have got 100% right before we push them out and have to support

Re: [Announcement] New Committer - Roshani Nagmote

2019-01-08 Thread kellen sunderland
Congrats Roshani. Well deserved. On Tue, Jan 8, 2019, 8:29 AM Marco de Abreu Great to have you on board, Roshani! > > -Marco > > Am Di., 8. Jan. 2019, 15:18 hat Carin Meier > geschrieben: > > > Please join me in welcoming Roshani Nagmote as a new committer. > > > > She has been active in the

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

2019-01-07 Thread kellen sunderland
t; Steffen > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:39 PM kellen sunderland < > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Sorry to hear about the licensing issues. I was following the general > > vote but I'm still lacking some clarity around what licenses in the > > onnx-trt r

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

2019-01-07 Thread kellen sunderland
Sorry to hear about the licensing issues. I was following the general vote but I'm still lacking some clarity around what licenses in the onnx-trt repo need to be surfaced. I believe onnx-trt is MIT licensed, but it includes Onnx as a third party repo which then brings in dependencies with a

Re: [DISCUSS] About the usage of CUDA/CUDNN

2018-12-17 Thread kellen sunderland
ted from > internet). It would bring us the best security we have. > > Thanks, > Qing > > On 12/17/18, 2:06 PM, "kellen sunderland" > wrote: > > I'm not in favour of publishing artifacts from any Jenkins based > systems. > There are many ways to bu

Re: [DISCUSS] About the usage of CUDA/CUDNN

2018-12-17 Thread kellen sunderland
I'm not in favour of publishing artifacts from any Jenkins based systems. There are many ways to bundle artifacts and publish them from an automated system. Why we would use a CI system like Jenkins for this task? Jenkins frequently has security vulnerabilities and is designed to run arbitrary

Re: Julia CI Package

2018-12-14 Thread kellen sunderland
If it's hanging consistently would you be able to dump a native stack trace and see what call specifically is hanging? On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 11:38 AM Alex Zai wrote: > Is anyone familiar with the Julia build and can help debug an issue where > the Julia stage in the CI just hangs? I have made

Re: [Announcement] New Committer -- Aaron Markham

2018-12-03 Thread kellen sunderland
Congrats Aaron. Really appreciate all the effort spent improving the documentation. On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 6:30 PM Hagay Lupesko wrote: > Congrats Aaron! > Your work on the docs definitely set a new standard and helps the community > tremendously - well deserved! > > > On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at

Re: [Announcement] New Committer -- Rahul Huilgol

2018-12-03 Thread kellen sunderland
Congrats Rahul, well deserved. On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 6:24 PM Tianqi Chen wrote: > Let us welcome Rahul Huilgol as a new Committer of MXNet. He has > contributed to many fronts, including the FP16 support, distributed > training and mixed precision support of MXNet. He has a breadth of >

Re: Adding AMD CPU to CI

2018-11-30 Thread kellen sunderland
e on a different instance type. In > >> that > >>>> Case, it should not be a big deal. > >>>> > >>>> If there are big differences, that's already a yellow flag for > >>>> compatibility, but that's unlikely. But in that case, we wou

Re: Adding AMD CPU to CI

2018-11-30 Thread kellen sunderland
least we can contribute to reducing the carbon footprint and slows > down > the global warming :) > > Tianqi > > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 9:38 AM kellen sunderland < > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Regarding cost, yes we could ru

Re: Adding AMD CPU to CI

2018-11-30 Thread kellen sunderland
> just > > > like x86, AVX, SSE etc., and any difference in behaviors (quite > > impossible > > > to happen or it will be a major defect) would most likely be > caused by > > the > > > underlying hardware implementation, so sti

Re: Adding AMD CPU to CI

2018-11-29 Thread kellen sunderland
Just looked at the mf16c work and wanted to mention Rahul clearly _was_ thinking about AMD users in that PR. On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 3:46 PM kellen sunderland < kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > From my perspective we're developing a few features like mf16c and MKLDNN >

Re: Adding AMD CPU to CI

2018-11-29 Thread kellen sunderland
>From my perspective we're developing a few features like mf16c and MKLDNN integration specifically for Intel CPUs. It wouldn't hurt to make sure those changes also run properly on AMD cpus. On Thu, Nov 29, 2018, 3:38 PM Hao Jin I'm a bit confused about why we need extra functionality tests

Re: Adding AMD CPU to CI

2018-11-29 Thread kellen sunderland
+1 On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 2:50 PM Seth, Manu wrote: > +1 > > On 11/29/18, 2:39 PM, "Alex Zai" wrote: > > What are people's thoughts on having AMD machines tested on the CI? AMD > machines are now available on AWS. > > Best, > Alex > > >

Re: [Announce] Upcoming Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.4.0 release

2018-11-29 Thread kellen sunderland
wrote: > Kellen - please merge your PR before v1.4.x branch is created or integrate > afterwards. > Steffen > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 7:01 PM kellen sunderland < > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hey Steffen, I'd like to be able to merge this PR for ve

Re: [Anouncement] New Committer: Tao Lv

2018-11-26 Thread kellen sunderland
Welcome Tao! On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 7:13 PM Sheng Zha wrote: > We are pleased to announce Tao Lv as a new committer of Apache > MXNet. Tao's sustained contribution to the project has been greatly helping > the CPU performance of MXNet. > > Please join me to welcome Tao to the team! > > -sz >

Re: CI impaired

2018-11-25 Thread kellen sunderland
Sorry, [1] meant to reference https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-37984 . On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 5:41 PM kellen sunderland < kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Marco and I ran into another urgent issue over the weekend that was > causing builds to fail. This issue w

Re: CI impaired

2018-11-25 Thread kellen sunderland
Marco and I ran into another urgent issue over the weekend that was causing builds to fail. This issue was unrelated to any feature development work, or other CI fixes applied recently, but it did require quite a bit of work from Marco (and a little from me) to fix. We spent enough time on the

Re: CI impaired

2018-11-24 Thread kellen sunderland
Hey Marco, I'm still having quite a few issues passing PRs. Would you be able to at least test a handful of PRs and make sure they pass/fail tests as you expect? On Sat, Nov 24, 2018, 7:01 PM Marco de Abreu Hello Steffen, > > thank you for bringing up these PRs. > > I had to abort the builds

Re: Include MKLDNN into default mxnet pip package

2018-11-21 Thread kellen sunderland
Agree with your point about other repos also not being based on versioning Tao. I would point out that I've given some that I've worked with similar feedback: https://github.com/onnx/onnx-tensorrt/issues/68 On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 6:48 PM Naveen Swamy wrote: > Tao, > > You are right there are

Re: Include MKLDNN into default mxnet pip package

2018-11-21 Thread kellen sunderland
I've spent the last few days testing MXNet w/ MKLDNN and quantized models and it's a beast. Really good speed improvements on my models, no bugs that I've noticed. I'm in general supportive but I'm still wondering what the story is like when there's no AVX instructions present on CPUs. Do we

Re: [Announce] Upcoming Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.4.0 release

2018-11-20 Thread kellen sunderland
/commit/2c3357443ec3d49a11e93c89f278264ce10c2f08 On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 7:00 PM kellen sunderland < kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hey Steffen, I'd like to be able to merge this PR for version 1.4: > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13310 . It fixes a > regre

Re: [Announce] Upcoming Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.4.0 release

2018-11-20 Thread kellen sunderland
Hey Steffen, I'd like to be able to merge this PR for version 1.4: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13310 . It fixes a regression in master which causes incorrect feature vectors to be output when using the TensorRT feature. (Thanks to Nathalie for helping me track down the root

Re: Should PR-860 (Use modernized range loops where possible) be reverted?

2018-11-20 Thread kellen sunderland
Hey Carin, I don't think there's any issues merging this PR. The veto'd aspect was around _requiring_ modern loop usage, and failing the build if clang tidy detected modern loops could be used but weren't. The original PR included a check for this and would fail any builds not using modern

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.3.1.rc0

2018-11-16 Thread kellen sunderland
Just tested with 1.3.0 and those tests were failing for that release as well. Given it's not a regression I'm +1 (non-binding). On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 11:52 PM kellen sunderland < kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for organizing the release Anton and for testing Carin and

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.3.1.rc0

2018-11-15 Thread kellen sunderland
Thanks for organizing the release Anton and for testing Carin and Steffen. Lots of great fixes in this release. As we don't have the required 3 committers I'd suggest extending the vote for a few days. I tested the following on MacOS 10.13, High Sierra: INCUBATING IN RELEASE FILE: check.

Re: MKLDNN dynamically linked

2018-11-08 Thread kellen sunderland
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

Re: [VOTE] Separating PMC and Committership

2018-11-08 Thread kellen sunderland
+1 (non-binding) On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 10:37 AM Thomas DELTEIL wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > Le jeu. 8 nov. 2018 à 10:04, Carin Meier a écrit : > > > Reminder - Vote ends tomorrow- Friday Nov 9th at 6:00 am EST > > > > On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 11:29 AM Carin Meier > wrote: > > > > > This is a

Re: [RESULT][LAZY VOTE] Next MXNet release

2018-11-07 Thread kellen sunderland
t; > >> discussed. I summarized discussion here > > >> < > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Hangout+October+24th+2018+8am+and+5pm+PDT > > > > and > > >> updated the release proposal page > > >> < > > >

Re: [DISCUSS] Speedup non-code PR in CI

2018-11-06 Thread kellen sunderland
There's some documentation summarizing what we've discussed in the past on this site: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/CI+Runtime+Improvements On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 10:56 AM Pedro Larroy wrote: > It has been raised but there are practical complications about introducing > an

Re: [DISCUSS] Build OSX builds in CI (possibly with TravisCI).

2018-11-06 Thread kellen sunderland
; > > Best, > >>>> > > > Sandeep > >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 9:51 AM Marco de Abreu > >>>> > > > wrote: > >>>> > > > > >>>> > > &g

Re: Hold on the merge of new MKL-DNN operator tests

2018-11-03 Thread kellen sunderland
Hey Tao, thanks for letting the community know. It's completely understandable if you want to dig deep on the failure. Don't worry about taking a little extra time to get to the bottom of test failures, that's exactly the reason we have the CI setup. Let us know if there's anything you think we

Re: Coverity scan

2018-11-02 Thread kellen sunderland
ing for code quality. As a developer I wonder, do we have actionable > items for looking at / fixing these issues or right now is done in an > informational / good will basis? > > Is there a way to colorize this output? > > Pedro. > > On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 5:10 PM kellen su

Re: Coverity scan

2018-11-02 Thread kellen sunderland
Reference scan here (I believe I also count 5 memory violations): http://jenkins.mxnet-ci.amazon-ml.com/blue/rest/organizations/jenkins/pipelines/incubator-mxnet/branches/master/runs/1856/nodes/104/log/?start=0 -Kellen On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 9:07 AM kellen sunderland < kellen.sund

Re: Coverity scan

2018-11-02 Thread kellen sunderland
Hey Anton, can you provide a sample scan? I'm interested to see if it catches different memory access violations, or if it gets the same ones we've already seen reported by clang-tidy. For example are these violations in the reports: --

Re: [VOTE] - Adopt "Become a Committer and PPMC Member" Document

2018-10-29 Thread kellen sunderland
+1 non-binding. As mentioned in various threads, this model should be much more scalable. I like the idea of hierarchies of contributors on the project. On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 3:47 PM Carin Meier wrote: > This vote is to adopt the document > >

Re: [DISCUSS] - Revisions to Committer Criteria

2018-10-29 Thread kellen sunderland
, Oct 29, 2018 at 10:38 AM kellen sunderland < kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > I believe the wording _must_ comes from the fact that the PMC (as a body) > must have a formal vote for a release, otherwise the release will not > happen. I don't believe it means every PMC member is

Re: [DISCUSS] - Revisions to Committer Criteria

2018-10-29 Thread kellen sunderland
I believe the wording _must_ comes from the fact that the PMC (as a body) must have a formal vote for a release, otherwise the release will not happen. I don't believe it means every PMC member is required to vote on the release. I can see where the confusion comes from, but also feel the

Re: Apache MXNet (incubating) Python Docker Images

2018-10-22 Thread kellen sunderland
Hey Sergio, I think it's mostly to keep the Dockerfile size down by matching the system python package. Of course people can extend the image and use python 3.6 / 3.7. I think we should follow this up with an update to the new Ubuntu LTS version as a base docker image at which point it would use

Re: Include MKLDNN into default mxnet pip package

2018-10-17 Thread kellen sunderland
First of all thanks to Intel for these improvements, really a great effort. What would the compatibility story look like for users that don't have these AVX instructions? Would there be any negative affect for AMD users? Regarding TensorRT: It's a possibility but not planned in the short term.

Re: Apache MXNet (incubating) Python Docker Images

2018-10-17 Thread kellen sunderland
This feels like something we should get a little data on before making a decision, but I also don't have a strong opinion. I would bias towards pushing something that might be imperfect and moving on to develop other improvements for users rather than determining a 'perfect' solution. The

Re: [LAZY VOTE]: rename dockerfiles s/.build.//

2018-10-17 Thread kellen sunderland
oduction use-case with only > necessary runtime packages. > > -1 > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 11:48 AM kellen sunderland < > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hey Pedro, sorry I still don't see a good reason to justify changing the > > filenames. Renam

Re: [LAZY VOTE]: rename dockerfiles s/.build.//

2018-10-17 Thread kellen sunderland
> suggested by several MXNet contributors during review. > > Pedro. > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 11:21 AM kellen sunderland < > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > -1. (non-binding) > > > > These Dockerfiles are very bloated and imo only useful

Re: [LAZY VOTE]: rename dockerfiles s/.build.//

2018-10-17 Thread kellen sunderland
-1. (non-binding) These Dockerfiles are very bloated and imo only useful for creating a build environment or running tests. Just as you wouldn't setup a server for a service and then install 200 packages that may or may not be used for the service I wouldn't recommend using these Dockerfiles at

Re: Proposal for subgraph based the graph optimization and quantization

2018-10-15 Thread kellen sunderland
Nice Patric, thanks for the effort. 2x faster on mobilenet is a great result. On Mon, Oct 15, 2018, 7:37 AM Zhao, Patric wrote: > Updates for this proposal: > > The most important step (op fusion and quantization) of this proposal is > merged into master. > > We're very happy that this is the

Re: MXNet - Label Bot functionality

2018-10-12 Thread kellen sunderland
Awesome work! Many thanks. On Fri, Oct 12, 2018, 1:19 AM Harsh Patel wrote: > Hey, > I am looking to contribute to MXNet. I have a working implementation based > on my proposed design structure according to this wiki page ( > >

Call for contributions - CI Runtime Improvements

2018-10-10 Thread kellen sunderland
Hello MXNet Community, Some community members recently had an offline brainstorming focused on how to speed up CI builds and test runs. I've summarized some of that offline discussion, but we'd like to call out that we're also open to new ideas from the community. If others have speedup

Re: [Discussion] Separating PMC and Committership

2018-10-10 Thread kellen sunderland
I think it makes a lot of sense to separate these roles Haibin. My impression is there's a high degree of knowledge and experience required to make strategic design decisions on the project. There's a bunch of core members of the team that have that knowledge, and I feel there's a bit of an

Re: [Discuss] Next MXNet release

2018-10-09 Thread kellen sunderland
: > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Graph+Optimiz > > ation+and+Quantization+based+on+subgraph+and+MKL-DNN > > > Lead Contributor: Patric Zhao, > https://github.com/pengzhao-intel/ > > > > > > Regarding

Re: CUDNN algorithm selection failure

2018-10-04 Thread kellen sunderland
"I ran a similar test(test_slice_batchnorm) for 5K times and I couldn't reproduce the issue." One thing to keep in mind is that the SelectAlgo call will cache results in a registry that is in static scope. To repro you'd likely have to create a new process each time you run the test. (Apologies

Re: [DISCUSS] Use modernized C++11 range loops uniformly throughout the project

2018-10-04 Thread kellen sunderland
gt; the list at the bottom of the loop Seems like a rule for the sake of > > having a rule. > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 2:12 AM kellen sunderland < > > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hello MXNet devs, > > > > > > I'd like

Re: Time out for Travis CI

2018-10-01 Thread kellen sunderland
Abreu" wrote: I think the timeout and other limitations have been employed by Apache Infra and not by Travis. They didn't say that specifically, but they already made me aware that we might get further restrictions if we consume too many resources. kellen sunderland schrieb am Di., 2. Okt. 2

Re: Time out for Travis CI

2018-10-01 Thread kellen sunderland
> from Infra when I had a chat with them a few days ago. But from that > conversation it was made pretty clear that we cannot increase the limits. > > -Marco > > kellen sunderland schrieb am Di., 2. Okt. > 2018, 03:25: > > > Interesting, this page seems to indicate that p

Re: Time out for Travis CI

2018-10-01 Thread kellen sunderland
Interesting, this page seems to indicate that private projects do have a longer time out. I'll drop Travis a quick email and see what the deal would be for our project. https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/customizing-the-build/#build-timeouts. On Tue, Oct 2, 2018, 3:15 AM kellen sunderland wrote

Re: Time out for Travis CI

2018-10-01 Thread kellen sunderland
> Thanks, > Qing > > On 10/1/18, 6:08 PM, "kellen sunderland" > wrote: > > Does the global time out change for paid plans? I looked into it > briefly > but didn't see anything that would indicate it does. > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018, 2:25 AM Pedro

Re: Time out for Travis CI

2018-10-01 Thread kellen sunderland
te: > > > This makes sense. Thanks > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 6:36 PM kellen sunderland < > > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hey Zhennan, yes this is the exact problem, and I agree with your > points > > > completely. This is why wh

Re: [DISCUSS] Use modernized C++11 range loops uniformly throughout the project

2018-09-30 Thread kellen sunderland
> > > > // since C++11 > > > > struct cow_string { /* ... */ }; > > > > // a copy-on-write string cow_string str = /* ... */; > > > > // for(auto x : str) { /* ... */ } // may cause deep copy > > > > for(auto x : std::as_const(str)) {

Re: Time out for Travis CI

2018-09-29 Thread kellen sunderland
ly I don't know yet. I can help to investigate. Just given the > > evidence that, travis timeout every time it gets re-triggered - 2 > > times at least. Correct me if I'm wrong @ Zhennan On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 > > at 1:54 PM kellen sunderland wrote: > > > > > > Read

Re: Time out for Travis CI

2018-09-29 Thread kellen sunderland
. Do you have a time plan to solve the > timeout issue? Rebasing can't work for my case. Or shall we run it silently > to disallow it voting X for overall CI result? Because most developers are > used to ignore the PRs with 'X'. > > > > Thanks, > > Zhennan > > > &g

Re: [DISCUSS] Use modernized C++11 range loops uniformly throughout the project

2018-09-29 Thread kellen sunderland
> > friction for developers imho. > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 7:42 AM kellen sunderland < > > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > "Range loops aren’t always the most performant way" Do you have an > > example > &g

Re: [Discuss] Next MXNet release

2018-09-28 Thread kellen sunderland
Sorry I meant to say next 'Regarding the *minor* release'. On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 5:27 AM kellen sunderland < kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for transparently setting a rough timeline Steffen. I think this > will go a long way in helping the community plan thei

Re: [Discuss] Next MXNet release

2018-09-28 Thread kellen sunderland
Thanks for transparently setting a rough timeline Steffen. I think this will go a long way in helping the community plan their work, even if the details change somewhat on the road to the release. Regarding the major release: I would propose we unify TensorRT with the subgraph operator work.

Re: [DISCUSS] Use modernized C++11 range loops uniformly throughout the project

2018-09-28 Thread kellen sunderland
ddition, sometimes > you want the index. Or maybe you want to iterate backwards, or not start > from the first, etc. Maybe you want the iterator because you remove it from > the list at the bottom of the loop Seems like a rule for the sake of > having a rule. > > On

Re: Time out for Travis CI

2018-09-28 Thread kellen sunderland
Hey Zhennan, you're safe to ignore Travis failures for now. They're just informational. The reason you sometimes see quick builds and sometimes see slow builds is that we're making use of ccache in between builds. If your PR is similar to what's in master you should build very quickly, if not

Re: Maturity Model and Graduation

2018-09-28 Thread kellen sunderland
Hey Jim, welcome to the community. To the best of my knowledge we have not yet discussed/run a Maturity Model. My gut feel is that MXNet would come away a fairly bi-model result. My view of the project is that it's getting the Apache Way right in terms of Code, Releases, and Quality. I think

[DISCUSS] Use modernized C++11 range loops uniformly throughout the project

2018-09-28 Thread kellen sunderland
Hello MXNet devs, I'd like to discuss uniformly adopting C++11 range loops in the MXNet project. The benefits I see are: * Improved C++ readability (examples below). * Consistency with other languages. The range-loops are quite similar to loops almost all other programming languages. Given

Re: Which merge option to use on the Import Julia binding PR?

2018-09-26 Thread kellen sunderland
My gut feel would be just to squash and merge, it usually works quite well. Is there any chance that someone might want to cherry-pick, revert or rebase any portions of the PR? If so what I try and is to provide atomic commits the bring small individual pieces of value to the codebase. This

Re: A New API for creating .rec files

2018-09-25 Thread kellen sunderland
This makes a lot of sense to me Anirudh. On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 11:38 AM Anirudh Acharya wrote: > Hi, > > During some recent MXNet user surveys, one of the user requests was to have > a im2rec API that will have similar functionality as the im2rec tool( >

Re: Some feedback from MXNet Zhihu topic

2018-09-25 Thread kellen sunderland
Thanks for the detailed feedback Foivos. Just want to dig into the C++ comment. Any more details you could give on how we could improve the readability. Would modernizing the codebase and trying to provide consistent code style help? In regards to documentation was it that it's mostly lacking,

Re: clang-tidy and static code analysis

2018-09-14 Thread kellen sunderland
-awaiting-review -Kellen On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 10:02 AM kellen sunderland < kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Great suggestion Philip, and thanks for the reference. I've run a few > sanitizers locally but didn't see any output that concerned me. Absolutely > on my todo l

Re: [DISCUSS] Build OSX builds in CI (possibly with TravisCI).

2018-09-12 Thread kellen sunderland
e get aware of any problems. > > > > The next step will be integration of Python CPU unit tests. There will > be a > > separate email if we got an update on that manner. > > > > Special thanks to Kellen Sunderland for the contribution of this Travis > CI > > pipel

GitHub having issues today

2018-09-11 Thread kellen sunderland
FYI GitHub is having issues today. It's severe enough that it's blocking my ability to validate PRs. I'm sure it will be resolved soon, but it might be a good day to read a few papers ;-). https://status.github.com/messages -Kellen

  1   2   3   >