gt;
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/commit/2c3357443ec3d49a11e93c89f278264ce10c2f08
> > > > >>>>>>>
> &g
llen.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-mxn
ture vectors to
> > >> be
> > >>>>> output
> > >>>>>>>> when using the TensorRT feature. (Thanks to Nathalie for
> > >>> helping me
> > >>>>>>> track
> > >>>>>>>> do
to Nathalie for
> >>> helping me
> >>>>>>> track
> >>>>>>>> down the root cause of the issue). I'm currently blocked on a
> >>> CI
> >>>>> issue
> >>>>>>> I
> >>>>>>>> have
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 cau
gt; >>>>>>>> down the root cause of the issue). I'm currently blocked on a
> >>> CI
> >>>>> issue
> >>>>>>> I
> >>>>>>>> haven't seen before, but hope to have it resolved by EOW.
> >>>
;
>>>>>>>> One call-out I would make is that we currently don't support
>>> Turing
>>>>>>>> architecture (sm_75). I've been slowly trying to add support,
>>> but I
>>>>>>> don't
>>>>>>>
ged this week.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Call for contributions from the community: Right now we have
> 10
> > PR
> > > > > > >> awaiting
> > > > > > >> merge
> > > > > > &
10
> PR
> > > > > >> awaiting
> > > > > >> merge
> > > > > >> <
> > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+label%3Apr-awaiting-merge+
>
> > > > >> <
> > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+label%3Apr-awaiting-merge+
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> and
> > >
=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+label%3Apr-awaiting-review
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> I would appreciate if you all can help to review the open PR and
the
> > > > >> committers can drive the merge before code freeze for 1.4.0.
&g
8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+label%3Apr-awaiting-review
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> I would appreciate if you all can help to review the open PR and the
> > > > >> committers can drive the merge before code freeze for 1.4.0
gt; >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+label%3Apr-awaiting-review
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> I would appreciate if you
t;
> > > >> The contributors on the Java API are making progress, but
> not all
> > > >> performance issues are resolved. With some luck it should be
> > possible to
> > > >> code freeze towards end of this week.
>
> > >> committers can drive the merge before code freeze for 1.4.0.
> > > >>
> > > >> The contributors on the Java API are making progress, but
> not all
> > > >> performance issues are resolved. With some luck it
atures/bugs/PR you think need to be
> included
> > in
> > >> 1.4.0? If so, please communicate as soon as possible.
> > >>
> > >> Regards,
> > >> Steffen
> > >>
be
> included
> > in
> > >> 1.4.0? If so, please communicate as soon as possible.
> > >>
> > >> Regards,
> > >> Steffen
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 8:26 PM Zhao, Patric <
>
ve the merge before code freeze for 1.4.0.
> > > >>
> > > >> The contributors on the Java API are making progress, but not all
> > > >> performance issues are resolved. With some luck it should be
> possible to
> > > >> code freeze towar
anks, Steffen. I think there is NO open issue to block the MKLDNN
> to
> > GA
> > > > now.
> > > >
> > > > BTW, several quantization related PRs (#13297,#13260) are under the
> > > review
> > > > and I think it can be merged in this week.
>
n issue to block the MKLDNN to
> GA
> > > now.
> > >
> > > BTW, several quantization related PRs (#13297,#13260) are under the
> > review
> > > and I think it can be merged in this week.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > &
> > > > > think I'd have capacity to do this done by EOW. Does anyone
> > feel
> > > > > > > strongly
> > > > > > > > we need this in the 1.4 release? From my perspective this will
> > > >
PM Zhao, Patric
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Thanks, Steffen. I think there is NO open issue to block the MKLDNN
to
> >> GA
> >> > now.
> >> >
> >> > BTW, several quantization related PRs (#13297,#132
m>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Thanks Patrick, lets target to get the PR's merged this week.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Call for contribut
m>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Thanks Patrick, lets target to get the PR's merged this week.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Call for contribut
t; > >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+label%3Apr-awaiting-merge+
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> and
> > > > > >> we have 61 open PR awaiting review.
> > > >
ge
> > > > > >> <
> > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+label%3Apr-awaiting-merge+
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >>
; >
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+label%3Apr-awaiting-review
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> I would appreciate if you all can help to review the open PR and the
> > > > >> committers can dri
can drive the merge before code freeze for 1.4.0.
> > > >>
> > > >> The contributors on the Java API are making progress, but not all
> > > >> performance issues are resolved. With some luck it should be
> possible to
> > > >> code fr
you think need to be included
> > in
> > >> 1.4.0? If so, please communicate as soon as possible.
> > >>
> > >> Regards,
> > >> Steffen
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 8:26 PM Zhao, Patric
> > >> wrot
; >>
> >> > Thanks, Steffen. I think there is NO open issue to block the MKLDNN to
> >> GA
> >> > now.
> >> >
> >> > BTW, several quantization related PRs (#13297,#13260) are under the
> >> review
> >> > and I think it
> > BTW, several quantization related PRs (#13297,#13260) are under the
>> review
>> > and I think it can be merged in this week.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > --Patric
>> >
>> >
>> > > -Original Message-
&g
e under the
> review
> > and I think it can be merged in this week.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > --Patric
> >
> >
> > > -Original Message-----
> > > From: Steffen Rochel [mailto:steffenroc...@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 20
--Patric
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Steffen Rochel [mailto:steffenroc...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2018 2:57 AM
> > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [Announce] Upcoming Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.4
fenroc...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2018 2:57 AM
> To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [Announce] Upcoming Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.4.0 release
>
> On Friday the contributors working on Java API discovered a potential
> performance problem with inference u
+1 to wait until Java API work is ready since it is a major feature of the
release, yet performance should be at least on par with Python.
Also, I consider the MKL-DNN feature to be another major feature of the
release, the performance boost on CPU is significant [1], as an example,
ResNet50-v1 is
On Friday the contributors working on Java API discovered a potential
performance problem with inference using Java API vs. Python. Investigation
is ongoing.
As the Java API is one of the main features for the upcoming release, I
suggest to post-pone the code freeze towards end of this week.
Pleas
I'd like to remind everyone that 'code freeze' would mean cutting a v1.4.x
release branch and all following fixes would need to be backported.
Development on master can be continued as usual.
Best
Anton
ср, 14 нояб. 2018 г. в 6:04, Steffen Rochel :
> Dear MXNet community,
> the agreed plan was t
37 matches
Mail list logo
