Skip to content

Different ROCm versions for Stable vs Preview (Nightly) #907

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

Closed
jithunnair-amd opened this issue Jan 12, 2022 · 1 comment · Fixed by #908
Closed

Different ROCm versions for Stable vs Preview (Nightly) #907

jithunnair-amd opened this issue Jan 12, 2022 · 1 comment · Fixed by #908

Comments

@jithunnair-amd
Copy link
Contributor

jithunnair-amd commented Jan 12, 2022

📚 Documentation

The chooser on pytorch.org doesn't allow for different set of "Compute Platform"s for Stable vs Preview (Nightly) "PyTorch build" options. For ROCm, the Stable build wheels are currently with ROCm4.2 (https://download.pytorch.org/whl/rocm4.2/torch_stable.html), but the Preview (Nightly) build wheels are currently with ROCm4.3.1 (https://download.pytorch.org/whl/nightly/rocm4.3.1/torch_nightly.html). Given the ROCm release cadence, it is likely that, at various points in time, we'll have different ROCm versions for Stable vs Preview (Nightly) builds.

Can the chooser logic be rewritten to allow for different set of Compute Platforms (or maybe other rows as well to make it generic) for different PyTorch Builds?

cc @jeffdaily @sunway513 @malfet @GB-Meta

@malfet
Copy link
Contributor

malfet commented Jan 13, 2022

This does not look like a correct statement, picker already allows to one to select different versions for CUDA between nightly and stable (before 1.10 in nightly CUDA-11.3 were available, though in stable it was only 11.1)
Let me quickly write a PR that changes version for nightly from 4.2 to 4.3

malfet added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 13, 2022
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 a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants