[Pkg-opencl-devel] OpenCL architectures

[Brice Videau]

On 05/07/2016 12:08, Tomasz Rybak wrote:
> Dnia 2016-07-05 08:08 Andreas Beckmann napisał(a):
>
>> On 2016-07-04 10:16, Tomasz Rybak wrote:
>>> I've checked status of available ICD providers, and:
>>> * PyOpenCL is built for amd64 and i386
>>> * Pocl is built for amd64, i386, kfreebsd-amd64, mips64el, powerpcspe
>> with the last upload (and the switch to llvm 3.8) this list is down to
>> amd64, i386 :-(
>> and powerpcspe was probably only "succcessful" due to using
>> DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nocheck
>>
>>> * Beignet is built for amd64, i386, kfreebsd-amd64, and kfreebsd-i386
>>> * Mesa is built for amd64, i386, and armhf
>>> * NVIDIA is built for amd64 and ppc64el
>> and i386
> Sorry - I was assuming that dropping support for i386 in CUDA meant
> that also OpenCL is dropped - but it's not the case.
>
>>> ocl-icd-libopencl1 is available for all architectures but I assume
>>> this is done to allof for experimenting with new OpenCL providers.
>>>
>>> I'd like to deal with this bug. I could change architecture to "any"
>>> but this would mean that PyOpenCL is build for architectures for which
>>> there is no ICD available. I can also put union of all mentioned
>>> architectures:
>>> Architecture: amd64 i386 kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 armhf ppc64el
> mips64el
>>> powerpcspe
>>> It seems a bit overkill, but doable.
>>>
>>> Which should I choose? I'm leaning towards second option, i.e. listing
>>> all architectures by hand.
>> depends a bit on the role of pyopencl - if it is similar to libopencl1,
>> the "any" might do. Otherwise it would be nice to have tests run at
>> build time ... and since that wont work in many cases due to hardware
>> requirements, before adding a new architecture pyopencl should have been
>> veryfied to work correctly against the available (proprietary) ICDs.
>>
> I see PyOpenCL as library to run OpenCL programs - so just "any" wont fit
> it.
> Both PyCUDA and PyOpenCL contain tests - I just don't run them automatically
> during build time to prevent building on buildd from failing.
>
> How do you (members of this group) test OpenCL packages? Do you have
> special hardware, or is there something available that I could use?
> I mean - I'd like to enable armhf and pps64el (from NVIDIA ICD)
> but don't want to upload package without at least running test on this
> architecture.
>
> Best regards.
>
I don't have an answer to this question. As the developer of 
opencl_ruby_ffi, which more or less is the ruby equivalent of PyOpenCL, 
I would be very interested in a solution to this problem.

Nonetheless, I am afraid the only solution is to develop a fake OpenCL 
implementation that would answer in a predictable manner for a limited 
but highly covering set of input. This would allow the creation of non 
regression tests for bindings and object models on top of OpenCL. This 
is huge work of course.

Best regards,