mxnet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Roshani Nagmote <roshaninagmo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Release plan - MXNET 1.3
Date Wed, 22 Aug 2018 18:12:42 GMT
Thanks Patric for reviewing the notes. Updated the doc with MKL-DNN points
you mentioned accordingly.

Regards,
Roshani

On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 8:03 PM Zhao, Patric <patric.zhao@intel.com> wrote:

> Hi Roshani,
>
> Good notes :)
>
> Several items about the performance and MKL-DNN in the below, please help
> take a review.
>
> @Da, Alex, if anything about MKL-DNN is missed, feel free to add.
>
> *Performance improvement
> +Support for dot(dns, csr) = dns and dot(dns, csr.T) = dns on CPU
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11113
> +Performance improvement for Batch Dot on CPU from mshadow
> https://github.com/dmlc/mshadow/pull/342
> -Fix the topk regression issue (#12197)
> This is the bugfix rather than performance improvements
>
>
> *MKL-DNN
> More functionality supports:
> +Support more activation functions, "sigmoid", "tanh", "softrelu"
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/10336
>
> Debugging functionality:
> +Result check
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12069
> +Backend switch
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12058
>
> Thanks,
>
> --Patric
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Roshani Nagmote [mailto:roshaninagmote2@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2018 1:53 AM
> > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Release plan - MXNET 1.3
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Thank you everyone for helping to clear release blockers. CI tests were
> failing
> > so we delayed RC by some time. But now the tests are passing and we are
> > ready to cut the release branch.
> >
> > I have drafted release notes here:
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28in
> > cubating%29+1.3.0+Release+Notes
> >
> >
> > Please take a look and update if I have missed anything. I will be
> cutting
> > RC0 tomorrow.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Roshani
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 2:28 PM Roshani Nagmote
> > <roshaninagmote2@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Sure will do. thanks.
> > >
> > > -Roshani
> > >
> > > On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 11:53 AM Afrooze, Sina <sina.beh@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi Roshani - Can you please make sure that this fix (which is already
> > >> merged to master) is also merged to the stable branch for 1.3.0:
> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11493 - Thanks, Sina
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 8/16/18, 10:51 AM, "Roshani Nagmote"
> > <roshaninagmote2@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>     Hi all,
> > >>
> > >>     Release status:
> > >>
> > >>     Currently, for release 1.3.0 there are a couple of issues open
> > >> which needs
> > >>     to be resolved before cutting RC.
> > >>
> > >>     The current date we are looking at for cutting RC0 is
> 08/17(Friday).
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>     Open issues which need to be looked at before cutting RC:
> > >>
> > >>        1. Topk regression issue
> > >>        <https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/12197> -
> > >> #12202 PR
> > >>        with fix <https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12202
> >
> > >>        2. Excessive memory allocation issue
> > >>        <https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/12116> -
> > >> #12184 PR
> > >>        with fix <https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12184
> >
> > >>        3. Test_io.test_csvIter breaks on CentOS
> > >>        <https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/12139> -
> > >> #12189 PR
> > >>        with fix
> > >> <https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12189>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>     @committers, could you please help review these PRs and get them
> > >> merged?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>     Thanks,
> > >>
> > >>     Roshani
> > >>
> > >>     On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 12:46 PM Roshani Nagmote <
> > >> roshaninagmote2@gmail.com>
> > >>     wrote:
> > >>
> > >>     > Talked to the person who ran resnet50 benchmarks offline. Build
> > >> flag was
> > >>     > not properly set so there was a difference in performance
> > >> numbers observed.
> > >>     > There is no issue caught and he was able to get the same
> results as
> > >>     > mentioned here https://mxnet.incubator.apache.org/faq/perf.html
> > >>     > <
> https://mxnet.incubator.apache.org/faq/perf.html#scoring-results>
> > >>     >
> > >>     > We are good here.
> > >>     >
> > >>     > Thanks,
> > >>     > Roshani
> > >>     >
> > >>     > On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 4:08 PM Roshani Nagmote <
> > >> roshaninagmote2@gmail.com>
> > >>     > wrote:
> > >>     >
> > >>     >> Hi Dom,
> > >>     >>
> > >>     >> I verified resnet50 run on MXNet master branch. Checked on
> > >> single gpu
> > >>     >> machine. Numbers match. I didn't see any performance
> degradation.
> > >>     >>
> https://mxnet.incubator.apache.org/faq/perf.html#scoring-results
> > >>     >>
> > >>     >> Can you please give me more details on the instance type and
> > >> script you
> > >>     >> ran exactly so that I can try to reproduce it again?
> > >>     >>
> > >>     >> Thanks,
> > >>     >> Roshani
> > >>     >>
> > >>     >>
> > >>     >> On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 12:31 PM Roshani Nagmote <
> > >>     >> roshaninagmote2@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>     >>
> > >>     >>> This is not a major feature. I meant other new feature
> > >> requests PR won't
> > >>     >>> be accepted in 1.3 release now.
> > >>     >>> Bug fixes will be accepted. I will be trying to reproduce the
> > >> regression
> > >>     >>> Dom mentioned today. :)
> > >>     >>>
> > >>     >>> Thanks,
> > >>     >>> Roshani
> > >>     >>>
> > >>     >>> On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 12:06 PM Naveen Swamy
> > >> <mnnaveen@gmail.com
> > >> >
> > >>     >>> wrote:
> > >>     >>>
> > >>     >>>> Is this is a major feature? This is a regression that Dom is
> > >> reporting
> > >>     >>>> wrt
> > >>     >>>> to performance
> > >>     >>>>
> > >>     >>>> On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 11:38 AM, Roshani Nagmote <
> > >>     >>>> roshaninagmote2@gmail.com
> > >>     >>>> > wrote:
> > >>     >>>>
> > >>     >>>> > Thanks for reporting this issue Dom.
> > >>     >>>> > 08/10 (Frida)y was the major feature freeze date. We won't
> be
> > >>     >>>> accepting any
> > >>     >>>> > new features now for MXNet 1.3 release.
> > >>     >>>> > RC0 will be cut on 08/17(Friday).
> > >>     >>>> >
> > >>     >>>> > Will be verifying the performance degradation issue
> mentioned.
> > >>     >>>> >
> > >>     >>>> > Thanks,
> > >>     >>>> > Roshani
> > >>     >>>> >
> > >>     >>>> > On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 8:45 AM Divakaruni, Dominic
> > >>     >>>> > <ddivakar@amazon.com.invalid> wrote:
> > >>     >>>> >
> > >>     >>>> > > Hi all, We tested resnet50 on MXNet built from master
> > >> branch on
> > >>     >>>> Friday
> > >>     >>>> > and
> > >>     >>>> > > were seeing degraded performance on GPU - about 50%
> > >> slower compared
> > >>     >>>> to
> > >>     >>>> > > these values here
> > >> https://mxnet.incubator.apache.org/faq/perf.html.
> > >>     >>>> FWIW
> > >>     >>>> > > this slowdown was seen for both MXNet as well as the TRT
> > >> integrated
> > >>     >>>> > MXNet.
> > >>     >>>> > >
> > >>     >>>> > > Something for you all to verify before or after you cut
> > >> the RC.
> > >>     >>>> > >
> > >>     >>>> > > Thx!
> > >>     >>>> > >
> > >>     >>>> > > On 8/13/18, 4:34 AM, "kellen sunderland" <
> > >>     >>>> kellen.sunderland@gmail.com>
> > >>     >>>> > > wrote:
> > >>     >>>> > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     Hey Roshani,
> > >>     >>>> > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     Has a RC branch already been cut?  If so, a quick
> heads
> > >> up that
> > >>     >>>> I
> > >>     >>>> > think
> > >>     >>>> > >     this commit should probably get into RC0 for 1.3.
> > >>     >>>> > >
> > >>     >>>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/commit/
> > >>     >>>> > ee8755a2531b322fec29c9c3d2aa3b8738da41f3
> > >>     >>>> > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     It won't cause issues for users, but from a
> versioning
> > >>     >>>> compatibility
> > >>     >>>> > >     perspective it's probably better that we remove these
> > >> functions
> > >>     >>>> in
> > >>     >>>> > this
> > >>     >>>> > >     release. This way we don't have to worry about major
> > >> bumps in
> > >>     >>>> the
> > >>     >>>> > next
> > >>     >>>> > >     release if they're removed.
> > >>     >>>> > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     -Kellen
> > >>     >>>> > >
> > >>     >>>> > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 7:24 PM Roshani Nagmote <
> > >>     >>>> > > roshaninagmote2@gmail.com>
> > >>     >>>> > >     wrote:
> > >>     >>>> > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > Thanks Kellen and everyone else for working to get
> > >> TensorRT PR
> > >>     >>>> > > merged!
> > >>     >>>> > >     > @Sina, I will be keeping track of that issue and
> fixes
> > >> to get
> > >>     >>>> in
> > >>     >>>> > the
> > >>     >>>> > >     > release.
> > >>     >>>> > >     >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > We are starting code freeze for 1.3 release today.
> A
> > >> release
> > >>     >>>> > > candidate will
> > >>     >>>> > >     > be cut on 08/17.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > Feel free to add any other comments/suggestions.
> > >>     >>>> > >     >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > Thanks,
> > >>     >>>> > >     > Roshani
> > >>     >>>> > >     >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 5:39 AM kellen sunderland <
> > >>     >>>> > >     > kellen.sunderland@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>     >>>> > >     >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > All merged and ready to go from my side Roshani
> (the
> > >>     >>>> TensorRT
> > >>     >>>> > PR).
> > >>     >>>> > >     > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > I agree with Sina that issue 12116 looks it's a
> > >> blocker.
> > >>     >>>> I'll
> > >>     >>>> > try
> > >>     >>>> > > and
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > reproduce it locally to get another datapoint.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 3:15 AM Afrooze, Sina <
> > >>     >>>> > sina.beh@gmail.com>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > wrote:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > Hi Roshani - I think this regression issue is a
> > >> release
> > >>     >>>> > blocker:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >
> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/12116
> > >>     >>>> - Sina
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > On 8/8/18, 12:40 PM, "Roshani Nagmote" <
> > >>     >>>> > > roshaninagmote2@gmail.com>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > wrote:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     Thanks, Kellen for letting me know.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 12:09 PM kellen
> > >> sunderland <
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     kellen.sunderland@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > Hey Roshani, I think it should be ready
> by
> > >> Friday.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > On Tue, Aug 7, 2018, 10:20 PM Roshani
> > >> Nagmote <
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > roshaninagmote2@gmail.com>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > wrote:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > Thanks Kellen. Yes, we were treating
> this
> > >> PR as a
> > >>     >>>> > release
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > blocker.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > Do you
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > have any ETA by which it will be
> completed?
> > >>     >>>> Approximate
> > >>     >>>> > > time
> > >>     >>>> > >     > will
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > also
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > work.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > @zhi, Thanks for bringing this PR into
> > >> notice. I
> > >>     >>>> will
> > >>     >>>> > > keep a
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > track
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > of it.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > -Roshani
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 11:30 AM Joshua
> Z.
> > >> Zhang <
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > cheungchih@gmail.com>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > wrote:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > I strongly suggest to track this PR
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > >
> > >>     >>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11908
> > >>     >>>> > <
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > >
> > >>     >>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11908
> > >>     >>>> > >
> > >>     >>>> > > in 1.3
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > release
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > which fixed the usability issue for
> > >> lower end
> > >>     >>>> > machines
> > >>     >>>> > > that
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > don’t have
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > as
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > large shared memory space as ec2
> > >> instances.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > Best,
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > - Zhi
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > > On Aug 7, 2018, at 9:05 AM, Roshani
> > >> Nagmote <
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > roshaninagmote2@gmail.com
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > wrote:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > > Hi all,
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > > Right now, we are delaying MXNet
> 1.3
> > >> release
> > >>     >>>> for
> > >>     >>>> > > pending
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > TensorRT PR
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > (
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > > https://github.com/apache/
> > >>     >>>> > incubator-mxnet/pull/11325
> > >>     >>>> > > ).
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > > I wanted to ask everyone for their
> > >> opinions
> > >>     >>>> if we
> > >>     >>>> > > should
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > delay
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > the
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > release
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > > to get tensorRT integration in or
> we
> > >> should go
> > >>     >>>> > ahead
> > >>     >>>> > > with
> > >>     >>>> > >     > the
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > release
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > and
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > > include tensorRT in next release.
> > >> Please
> > >>     >>>> provide
> > >>     >>>> > >     > suggestions.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > > Thanks,
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > > Roshani
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > > On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 12:45 AM
> Hagay
> > >> Lupesko
> > >>     >>>> <
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > lupesko@gmail.com>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > wrote:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> Some thoughts: why not keep it
> out of
> > >> 1.3,
> > >>     >>>> and
> > >>     >>>> > > merge it
> > >>     >>>> > >     > into
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > master
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > so
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > it
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> can go out with 1.4 instead?
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> Pros:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> - Reduce quality risks for 1.3
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> - More time to test and get
> feedback
> > >> before
> > >>     >>>> > release
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> - Avoid further delays in 1.3
> release
> > >> (lots
> > >>     >>>> of
> > >>     >>>> > good
> > >>     >>>> > > stuff
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > there
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > already
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > for
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> users)
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> Cons:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> - People will need to get master
> to
> > >>     >>>> experiment
> > >>     >>>> > with
> > >>     >>>> > > TRT
> > >>     >>>> > >     > (not
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > a major
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > issue
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> IMO)
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> Besides, TRT requires a build flag
> > >> anyway, so
> > >>     >>>> > MXNet
> > >>     >>>> > > users
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > consuming
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > built
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> packages (PyPi, Scala) will anyway
> > >> not be
> > >>     >>>> able to
> > >>     >>>> > > try it
> > >>     >>>> > >     > out
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > unless
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> building from source...
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> Thoughts?
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 10:38 PM
> > >> Steffen
> > >>     >>>> Rochel <
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > steffenrochel@gmail.com
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> wrote:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> Marek, Kellen, Jun, Da, Eric,
> myself
> > >> and a
> > >>     >>>> few
> > >>     >>>> > > other
> > >>     >>>> > >     > people
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > discussed
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> offline about TensorRT
> integration
> > >> PR (
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>
> > >>     >>>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11325 ).
> > >>     >>>> > >     > We
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > do
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > agree
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > that
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> it
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> would be good to include the PR
> into
> > >>     >>>> upcoming 1.3
> > >>     >>>> > >     > release,
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > but are
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > all
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> concerned about the risk involved
> > >> and the
> > >>     >>>> > breaking
> > >>     >>>> > > API
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > change. The
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> discussion converged to following
> > >> proposal.
> > >>     >>>> (1)
> > >>     >>>> > > change to
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > contrib
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > PR
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > and
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> (2) define a different top level
> API
> > >> to
> > >>     >>>> indicate
> > >>     >>>> > > that the
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > package
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > is
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > part
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> of contrib and experimental
> (details
> > >> of API
> > >>     >>>> TBD
> > >>     >>>> > > between
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > Marek,
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > Kellen
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > and
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> Eric). This change would allow to
> > >> include
> > >>     >>>> TRT
> > >>     >>>> > > integration
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > with v1.3
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > to
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> enable users to try TRT with
> MXNet,
> > >>     >>>> minimize the
> > >>     >>>> > > risk and
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > avoid
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > breaking
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> API change.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> To accommodate the change the
> > >> request is to
> > >>     >>>> delay
> > >>     >>>> > > RC for
> > >>     >>>> > >     > a
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > few
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > days.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> Regards,
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> Steffen
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 5:08 PM
> > >> Roshani
> > >>     >>>> Nagmote <
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> roshaninagmote2@gmail.com
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> wrote:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> Hi,
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> I have created a wiki for
> tracking
> > >> MXNet
> > >>     >>>> 1.3
> > >>     >>>> > > release
> > >>     >>>> > >     > with
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > the
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > timeline.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> Please take a look here:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     >
> > >>     >>>> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/
> > >>     >>>> > Apache+MXNet+%28incubating%29+1.3.0+Release+Status
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> I am still waiting for
> following 2
> > >> PRs to
> > >>     >>>> get
> > >>     >>>> > > merged:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> TRT integration:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > >
> > >>     >>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11325
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> Gluon RNN:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >
> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11482
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> *Code freeze date is
> > >> 08/02(Thursday).*
> > >>     >>>> Kindly
> > >>     >>>> > try
> > >>     >>>> > > to
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > complete
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > ongoing
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> work
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> and get these PRs merged.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> Thanks,
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> Roshani
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 1:02 PM
> > >> Roshani
> > >>     >>>> Nagmote
> > >>     >>>> > <
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> roshaninagmote2@gmail.com
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> wrote:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>> Hi all,
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>> Here is an update on MXNet 1.3
> > >> release:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>> I am still waiting for
> following
> > >> PRs to
> > >>     >>>> get
> > >>     >>>> > > merged:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>> TRT integration:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>
> > >>     >>>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11325
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>> Gluon RNN:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >
> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11482
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>> Scala examples:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11753
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11621
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>> *New code freeze date is:
> 08/03*
> > >> Please
> > >>     >>>> try to
> > >>     >>>> > > get
> > >>     >>>> > >     > your
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > ongoing
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > PRs
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>> merged by then.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>> @Pedro, I didn't include your
> PRs
> > >> in
> > >>     >>>> tracking
> > >>     >>>> > > list as
> > >>     >>>> > >     > you
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > said
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > those
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> are
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>> not critical for now. Please
> let
> > >> me know
> > >>     >>>> if
> > >>     >>>> > > those needs
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > to
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > be
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> included.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11636
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11562
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>> I also have updated project
> > >> proposal
> > >>     >>>> cwiki page
> > >>     >>>> > > to
> > >>     >>>> > >     > update
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > the
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > status
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> of
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>> PRs.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>> <
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     > >
> > >>     >>>> > >     >
> > >>     >>>> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/
> > >>     >>>> > Project+Proposals+for+next+MXNet+Release
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>> Please let me know if I am
> missing
> > >>     >>>> something.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>> Thanks,
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>> Roshani
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>> On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 1:34 PM
> > >> Pedro
> > >>     >>>> Larroy <
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>> I would like to get these PR
> > >> merged:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11636
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11562
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>> How much longer until the code
> > >> freeze?
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>> On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 1:44
> AM
> > >> Roshani
> > >>     >>>> > Nagmote
> > >>     >>>> > > <
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>> roshaninagmote2@gmail.com>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>> Hi all,
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>> PRs waiting to be merged for
> 1.3
> > >>     >>>> release:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11325
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>> Are there any other PRs
> waiting
> > >> to get
> > >>     >>>> > merged?
> > >>     >>>> > > Please
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > let me
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > know.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>> Release blocker issue:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/11853
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>> @Marco, @Kellen, Thanks for
> > >> bringing up
> > >>     >>>> the
> > >>     >>>> > > important
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > topic. I
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> agree
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>> with
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>> you and we(internal Amazon
> team)
> > >> will be
> > >>     >>>> > > working on
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > fixing the
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> disabled
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>> tests.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>> Currently, my colleague, Hao
> Jin
> > >> is
> > >>     >>>> working
> > >>     >>>> > on
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > compiling
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > the
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > list
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> of
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>> disabled tests and leading
> the
> > >> effort
> > >>     >>>> to fix
> > >>     >>>> > > them in
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > the
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > next
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > few
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> days.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>> Thanks,
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>> Roshani
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 6:39
> PM
> > >> kellen
> > >>     >>>> > > sunderland <
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>> kellen.sunderland@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>> Thanks again for organizing
> > >> Roshani.  I
> > >>     >>>> > > believe the
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > TensorRT
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> work
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> is
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>> ready
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>> for a merge.  Thanks to
> Marek
> > >> and all
> > >>     >>>> the
> > >>     >>>> > > NVIDIA
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > people
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > for
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> iterating
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>> on
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>> it.  If possible could a
> > >> committer
> > >>     >>>> review,
> > >>     >>>> > > make sure
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > it
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > meets
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> their
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>> expectations and then merge?
> > >> PR is
> > >>     >>>> here:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11325
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>> To Marco's point.  I'd
> > >> recommend we
> > >>     >>>> review
> > >>     >>>> > > some of
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > those
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> disabled
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>> tests
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>> and
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>> see how likely they are to
> > >> affect users
> > >>     >>>> > > before we
> > >>     >>>> > >     > cut
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > a
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > release.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>> Many of
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>> them are obviously not too
> > >> important
> > >>     >>>> from a
> > >>     >>>> > > user's
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > point of
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > view
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> (e.g.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>> downloading a
> sometimes-offline
> > >> image
> > >>     >>>> in a
> > >>     >>>> > > test).
> > >>     >>>> > >     > One
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > idea
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> would
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> be
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>> to
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>> try
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>> and address as many of the
> > >> customer
> > >>     >>>> > impacting
> > >>     >>>> > > issues
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > as
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > possible
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>> between
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>> code freeze and the RC0
> vote.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at
> 1:23 PM
> > >> Marco
> > >>     >>>> de
> > >>     >>>> > Abreu
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>> <
> marco.g.abreu@googlemail.com
> > >> .invalid>
> > >>     >>>> > wrote:
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>> Hello Roshani,
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>> frequent releases are good
> and
> > >> I'm
> > >>     >>>> > > supportive for
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > this
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > in
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> general
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> in
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>> order
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>> to provide our users with
> the
> > >> latest
> > >>     >>>> > > features and
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> improvements.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> But
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>> at
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>> the
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>> moment, I'm slightly
> concerned
> > >> about
> > >>     >>>> the
> > >>     >>>> > test
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > coverage
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > due to
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> [1]. I
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>> want
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>> us to be conscious about
> > >> cutting a
> > >>     >>>> release
> > >>     >>>> > > even
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > though
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > not
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > all
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> tests
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>> are
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>> enabled (29 disabled tests
> [2]
> > >> as of
> > >>     >>>> > today).
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > However, I
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> acknowledge
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>> that
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>> we
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>> have improved by a lot
> lately
> > >> thanks
> > >>     >>>> to
> > >>     >>>> > > everybody
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >> participating
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> and
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>> leading
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>> the efforts around
> improving
> > >> flaky
> > >>     >>>> tests.
> > >>     >>>> > > From a
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > retrospective
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>> point of
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>> view, we could say that
> these
> > >> efforts
> > >>     >>>> have
> > >>     >>>> > > actually
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > revealed
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> some
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>> quite
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>> interesting bugs and thus
> the
> > >> time
> > >>     >>>> was well
> > >>     >>>> > > spent
> > >>     >>>> > >     > and
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > yielded
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> good
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>> results.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>> What does the community
> think
> > >> about
> > >>     >>>> making
> > >>     >>>> > > another
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > sprint of
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>> improvements
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>> around tests followed up
> by a
> > >> period
> > >>     >>>> of 1-2
> > >>     >>>> > > weeks
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > during
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > which
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> we
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>> observe
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>> the failures closely to
> ensure
> > >> that no
> > >>     >>>> > > critical
> > >>     >>>> > >     > paths
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > are
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> impacted?
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>> If
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>> we
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>> are in a good shape by
> then,
> > >> we could
> > >>     >>>> > > continue the
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > release
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> process
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>> and
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>> at
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>> the same time have the
> > >> advantage of
> > >>     >>>> giving
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > contributors more
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> lead
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>> time
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>> to
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>> finish their work to
> ensure it
> > >> gets
> > >>     >>>> into
> > >>     >>>> > the
> > >>     >>>> > >     > release
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > in the
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>> desired
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>> quality.
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>> Again, thanks to everybody
> for
> > >> their
> > >>     >>>> > efforts
> > >>     >>>> > > during
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > the last
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>> weeks
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>> to
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>>>>> improve the usability and
> > >> stability of
> > >>     >>>> > > MXNet. This
> > >>     >>>> > >     > is
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > > great
> > >>     >>>> > >     > > >     > > > >>>>>> community
> > >>     >>>> > >

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message