Skip to content

ci: Uncap torch, allowing it to bump to 2.7.1 in constraints #614

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

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

booxter
Copy link
Contributor

@booxter booxter commented Jun 17, 2025

This also brings newer CUDA into CI.

Signed-off-by: Ihar Hrachyshka [email protected]

@booxter booxter marked this pull request as draft June 17, 2025 21:57
@booxter
Copy link
Contributor Author

booxter commented Jun 17, 2025

first merging #612 before considering this PR, due to overlap.

Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Jun 18, 2025

This pull request has merge conflicts that must be resolved before it can be
merged. @booxter please rebase it. https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/working-with-forks/syncing-a-fork

@mergify mergify bot added the needs-rebase label Jun 18, 2025
This also bring newer CUDA into CI.

Signed-off-by: Ihar Hrachyshka <[email protected]>
@mergify mergify bot removed the needs-rebase label Jun 18, 2025
@booxter booxter marked this pull request as ready for review June 18, 2025 14:33
@booxter
Copy link
Contributor Author

booxter commented Jun 18, 2025

To clarify the rationale here: the main product that consumes this library already switched to newer torch and (even newer) CUDA, we are past the point of considering holding testing in gate for newer versions. I know there were arguments made that a lot of leg-work should be done when bumping versions (for example, suggestions to run extensive result comparisons or looking at specific code diff between versions) but I don't think the onus of doing it is on folks taking care of CI. If training team is willing to invest in this, it's honorable of course (though I think looking at actual code diff is security theater and unnecessary slowdown; additional monitoring / analysis may be a better approach).

@booxter booxter requested a review from courtneypacheco June 19, 2025 01:19
Copy link

E2E (NVIDIA L40S x4) (python 3.11) workflow launched on this PR: View run

Copy link

e2e workflow succeeded on this PR: View run, congrats!

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 this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants