Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Radeon ROCm 2.9 Released With New "RALI" Library, rocTX

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
    bridgman
    AMD Linux

  • bridgman
    replied
    Originally posted by acowley View Post
    bridgman
    AMD Linux
    bridgman Thank you for clarifying. I would have preferred 2.8 either be skipped, or at least come with notice that 2.9 was days away. As someone who packages ROCm (for NixOS), it’s a bit frustrating having to re-start a new release cycle before even finishing the last.
    Yeah, fair point... and sorry about that. I'll see what we can do re: communication in that area now that we have downstream packaging going on. Thanks !

    Leave a comment:

  • tildearrow
    Senior Member

  • tildearrow
    replied
    Originally posted by coder View Post
    Really? Even now, I still can't reach the comment thread for that article!
    It seems that the Phoronix bot missed creating that thread. I have told Michael too, but he hasn't done anything yet.

    Leave a comment:

  • acowley
    Junior Member

  • acowley
    replied
    cb88
    Senior Member
    cb88 Sure, the issue is unpredictability. If every release was one week apart, I certainly wouldn’t try to package them all. That’s why I mentioned the possibility of the release notes saying something to this effect.

    Leave a comment:

  • cb88
    Senior Member

  • cb88
    replied
    Originally posted by acowley View Post
    bridgman
    AMD Linux
    bridgman Thank you for clarifying. I would have preferred 2.8 either be skipped, or at least come with notice that 2.9 was days away. As someone who packages ROCm (for NixOS), it’s a bit frustrating having to re-start a new release cycle before even finishing the last.
    If it is too much work for you... just package up whatever is currently yearly, biannual or quarterly... and move on, anyone needing the bleeding edge packages can get them on their own.

    Leave a comment:

  • acowley
    Junior Member

  • acowley
    replied
    bridgman
    AMD Linux
    bridgman Thank you for clarifying. I would have preferred 2.8 either be skipped, or at least come with notice that 2.9 was days away. As someone who packages ROCm (for NixOS), it’s a bit frustrating having to re-start a new release cycle before even finishing the last.

    Leave a comment:

  • bridgman
    AMD Linux

  • bridgman
    replied
    Originally posted by smartbitcoin View Post
    without Navi, please stop new release!
    Can you help me understand how that would help ?

    We have different teams with different skills working on various parts of the stack; some are heavily involved with new HW support while other components are not affected at all.

    Having upper level component teams stop releasing their changes wouldn't help the other teams to work faster.

    Originally posted by acowley View Post
    Why was this release pushed out so quickly after 2.8? The release notes don’t remotely justify 2.8 having so short a life.
    IIRC the 2.8 release was delayed quite a bit waiting for a couple of last minute bug fixes, while 2.9 started to catch up with regular schedule.
    bridgman
    AMD Linux
    Last edited by bridgman; 06 October 2019, 05:28 PM.

    Leave a comment:

  • coder
    Senior Member

  • coder
    replied
    Originally posted by tildearrow View Post
    I already reported the latter typo.
    Really? Even now, I still can't reach the comment thread for that article!

    Leave a comment:

  • tildearrow
    Senior Member

  • tildearrow
    replied
    Originally posted by coder View Post
    "quiet"

    Also, this article is missing a comment thread: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...lk-Moves-Lands

    Otherwise, I'd have noted "The wine can be quite noticeable" should be "win".
    I already reported the latter typo.

    Leave a comment:

  • Marc Driftmeyer
    Senior Member

  • Marc Driftmeyer
    replied
    One thing I've observed in this ROCm development growing pain in the ass reality, I've got plenty of time to wait on a custom AMD workstation build seeing as the goal posts for mature state in the Linux Kernel keeps getting kicked down the street, one kernel release after the next.

    Leave a comment:

  • acowley
    Junior Member

  • acowley
    replied
    Why was this release pushed out so quickly after 2.8? The release notes don’t remotely justify 2.8 having so short a life.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X