Skip to content

Pass current machine's architecture to rapids-dependency-file-generator. #54

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 15, 2024

Conversation

bdice
Copy link
Contributor

@bdice bdice commented Oct 9, 2024

This PR passes the current machine architecture to rapids-dependency-file-generator. This makes it possible to use arch-specific matrices in pyproject outputs.

@bdice bdice requested a review from a team as a code owner October 9, 2024 22:42
Copy link
Member

@jameslamb jameslamb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I totally support this! Just left one very small comment for consideration.

I also support not exposing configuration to turn this off... let's not add that complexity until we need it. Every RAPIDS CI job, DLFW builds, and devcontainers pass arch unconditionally to rapids-dependency-file-generator, I think it's safe to unconditionally pass it from here too.

Comment on lines +65 to +68
# RAPIDS projects all use "aarch64" to indicate arm architectures,
# but arm some systems (like the M1/M2/M3 Macs) report "arm64"
if plat == "arm64":
return "aarch64"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm fine with this for now, but it does feel like a bit of a hack. Technically platform.machine is probably not sufficiently discriminating between types of architectures in many cases, and in this particular case it is giving us a meaningful difference that we are choosing to ignore: our aarch64 dependency lists throughout RAPIDS are probably not valid on most Macs anyway. I'm comfortable with including this given that RBB is specialized enough for RAPIDS's needs that I don't expect anyone else to ever use it, but this line feels like a bit of a footgun in case anyone ever did try to.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I am going to leave this as-is for now. I don't anticipate this causing issues. xref: #54 (comment)

@bdice bdice self-assigned this Oct 15, 2024
@bdice bdice merged commit 03e76fb into rapidsai:main Oct 15, 2024
7 checks passed
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.

3 participants