Skip to content
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

Fix ucxx constraints #195

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Feb 21, 2024
Merged

Conversation

jakirkham
Copy link
Member

@jakirkham jakirkham commented Feb 20, 2024

ucxx's CUDA compiler dependency added a cuda-version constraint at runtime that meant packages could only be installed with the same CUDA version ucxx was built with or newer. As a result CUDA 12.2 builds of ucxx required that CUDA 12.2+ would be used at runtime

However as we use CUDA Compatibility in RAPIDS, we know that even if we built with CUDA 12.2, we can still use packages for other CUDA 12.x

This was largely handled for other dependencies as part of PR ( #161 ). However this wasn't handled for ucxx, which was likely in part as it was handling the CUDA compiler dependency differently from the other packages here. More history about ucxx's CUDA compiler dependency in PR: #108

This change aligns how CUDA compiler is handled across packages to make this more consistent. Also it ignores the CUDA compiler constraints added at runtime. In all cases the packages handle this themselves by requiring cuda-version (properly constrained) and when CUDA 11 is concerned they add cudatoolkit

Thus this change should fix CI issues that were seen due to this overly constrained cuda-version by relaxing that constraint

Previously the CUDA compiler was only used by `ucxx` for CUDA 12. This
makes sure it is used for CUDA 11 too to be consistent.
Having the CUDA compiler as a build dependency in `ucxx` means that some
requirements are added to `ucxx` at runtime (like a `cuda-version`
minimum). However we know we can have a more lax constraint on these
dependencies at runtime. So ignore `run_exports` that the CUDA compiler
would add.
@jakirkham jakirkham requested a review from a team as a code owner February 20, 2024 23:04
@jakirkham jakirkham added bug Something isn't working non-breaking Introduces a non-breaking change labels Feb 20, 2024
Copy link
Member

@pentschev pentschev left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @jakirkham !

@raydouglass
Copy link
Member

/merge

@rapids-bot rapids-bot bot merged commit 97e4375 into rapidsai:branch-0.37 Feb 21, 2024
47 checks passed
@jakirkham
Copy link
Member Author

Thanks all! 🙏

@jakirkham jakirkham deleted the fix_ucxx_constraints branch February 21, 2024 22:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working non-breaking Introduces a non-breaking change
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants