{lib}[gcccuda/2020b] NCCL v2.8.4-1

[branfosj]

(created using eb --new-pr)

easyblock in easybuilders/easybuild-easyblocks#2337 and minor fix in easybuilders/easybuild-easyblocks#2460

Fixes #12180

[Micket]

Should we limit it to the cuda compute capabilities that we have?

By default, NCCL is compiled for all supported architectures. To accelerate the compilation and reduce the binary size, consider redefining NVCC_GENCODE (defined in makefiles/common.mk) to only include the architecture of the target platform :

$ make -j src.build NVCC_GENCODE="-gencode=arch=compute_70,code=sm_70"

[Flamefire]

Test report by @Flamefire
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total)
taurusml3 - Linux RHEL 7.6, POWER, 8335-GTX (power9le), Python 2.7.5
See https://gist.github.com/ce8638c4a91f592497eef0bb085cb915 for a full test report.

[Flamefire]

Test report by @Flamefire
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total)
taurusi8019 - Linux centos linux 7.9.2009, x86_64, AMD EPYC 7352 24-Core Processor (zen2), Python 2.7.5
See https://gist.github.com/711ee113b01079ec87b6c5aff0ebfa6f for a full test report.

[boegel]

Should we limit it to the cuda compute capabilities that we have?

Yes, but ideally that's done in a custom easyblock, may be difficult to do it cleanly in an easyconfig (i.e. handle the case when --cuda-compute-capabilities is not set)

[branfosj]

Should we limit it to the cuda compute capabilities that we have?

Yes, but ideally that's done in a custom easyblock, may be difficult to do it cleanly in an easyconfig (i.e. handle the case when --cuda-compute-capabilities is not set)

I think we can just fallback to passing nothing to the NCCL build and let NCCL build the fat binary.

[verdurin]

Test report by @verdurin
Using easyblocks from PR(s) easybuilders/easybuild-easyblocks#2337
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 4 out of 4 (1 easyconfigs in total)
easybuild-c7.novalocal - Linux centos linux 7.9.2009, x86_64, Intel Xeon Processor (Skylake, IBRS), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/c685c3d2b31a200a6c4275273a4c4fbf for a full test report.

[branfosj]

Test report by @branfosj
Using easyblocks from PR(s) easybuilders/easybuild-easyblocks#2337
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total)
bear-pg0212u15b.bear.cluster - Linux RHEL 8.3, x86_64, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2640 v4 @ 2.40GHz (broadwell), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/3417e645d85399498e9a6bad3bab4974 for a full test report.

[branfosj]

Test report by @branfosj
Using easyblocks from PR(s) easybuilders/easybuild-easyblocks#2337
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total)
bear-pg0212u15b.bear.cluster - Linux RHEL 8.3, x86_64, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2640 v4 @ 2.40GHz (broadwell), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/78ba58131ace34827f40bfd84ed77838 for a full test report.

[branfosj]

Test report by @branfosj
Using easyblocks from PR(s) easybuilders/easybuild-easyblocks#2337
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total)
bear-pg0212u15b.bear.cluster - Linux RHEL 8.3, x86_64, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2640 v4 @ 2.40GHz (broadwell), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/7e7d884dc2fa2453291de987dcf031e5 for a full test report.

[Flamefire]

I'm thinking about the toolchain for this. Prior we had SYSTEM-CUDA, now (full)gcccuda, which means that it can't be used with Intel toolchains, can it?
So maybe GCCcore with CUDA dep and suffix?

[branfosj]

Closing this. Using #13071 instead.