From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1FC6B158099 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 00:09:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 160C22BC05B; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 00:09:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B7D322BC014 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 00:09:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [2a0c:b641:69c:e7f1:ad44:b75a:2c17:2034] (port=55842 helo=aurora) by muon.airelinux.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1r7PBi-0002d5-2d; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 00:09:22 +0000 From: Benda Xu To: Yiyang Wu Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 1/2] rocm.eclass: Fix the xnack feature for gfx90a In-Reply-To: <20231117032201.5213-1-xgreenlandforwyy@gmail.com> (Yiyang Wu's message of "Fri, 17 Nov 2023 11:21:17 +0800") References: <20231117032201.5213-1-xgreenlandforwyy@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 08:08:40 +0800 Message-ID: <87msv06os7.fsf@aurora.g.airelinux.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Archives-Salt: 707c0337-2519-4d1a-aef3-e4681d9bd75e X-Archives-Hash: 848898514f626d8f0450b6790c545572 Hi Yiyang, Yiyang Wu writes: > Upstream usually ships 2 version: gfx90a:xnack-, gfx90a:xnack+. Although > a single gfx90a should have maximum compatibility, According to [1,2], > compile with xnack+/xnack- may have better performance on xnack > enabled/disabled GPUs. Therefore we ship both the target, align with > upstream. gfx900 is also appended with :xnack- to align with upstream > default. > [1] https://llvm.org/docs/AMDGPUUsage.html#target-features > [2] https://docs.olcf.ornl.gov/systems/crusher_quick_start_guide.html#compiling-hip-kernels-for-specific-xnack-modes So, you want to add a new ABI to gfx90a for experimental xnack feature. I suggest make it gfx908a with gfx908a_xnack, instead of "gfx908a_noxnack" for consistency the existing naming scheme. With this minimal modification, the remaining cards such as gfx906 and gfx908 that support xnack could be updated incrementally. Benda