ci(pt_expt): cover torch.compile on a supported GPU release
Maintainers usually reply within 3 days
Nobody has claimed this yet.
Assessment
- Difficulty
- 3/5
- Estimated time
- 1-2 days
- Newbie friendliness
- 56/100
Research direction
Start by locating the GPU CI configuration and the focused pt_expt compile tests, then inspect the shared compile-version gate used by #5913. Add coverage for at least one supported PyTorch release while retaining the PyTorch 2.10 eager CUDA job; done means the compile safeguards run on GPU CI without changing the global pin.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Description
Problem
The repository-wide GPU CI environment currently pins PyTorch 2.10, while the supported torch.compile releases are PyTorch 2.11 and 2.12, with PyTorch 2.13 support added by #5910. Consequently, pt_expt compile-only tests cannot run on GPU CI under a supported PyTorch release.
This supported-version GPU coverage gap predates #5913. That PR only makes the existing contract explicit by using the shared compile-version gate, so the PyTorch 2.10 CUDA job now skips compile-only tests instead of exercising an unsupported configuration.
The compile path has been manually validated on CUDA with PyTorch 2.11, 2.12, and 2.13. The repository-wide GPU pin cannot currently be raised because of unrelated CI compatibility issues, and changing that pin is outside the scope of #5913.
Desired coverage
- Run the focused pt_expt compile tests on a GPU with at least one supported PyTorch release.
- Exercise CUDA-specific compile safeguards such as forced int64 indexing and the constrained Triton tiling configuration.
- Preserve the existing PyTorch 2.10 eager CUDA coverage until the unrelated CI blockers allow the global GPU pin to move.
Related
- #5913
- #5910
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 2.1k
- Forks
- 663
- Avg merge
- 3d 11h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 25
Getting set up
Starts the project's dev container in your browser, under your own GitHub account.
- No Dockerfile or Docker Compose file
- No pull request template
- Read the contributing guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
More from deepmodeling/deepmd-kit
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 73/100
deepmodeling/deepmd-kit#6086 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 3 days
-
Fine-tune descriptor mismatch warning should ignore seedPossibly taken @SiyuanChenToDo claimed this 23 days ago. Open
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 88/100
deepmodeling/deepmd-kit#6038 · 2 comments ·
Maintainers usually reply within 3 days
-
Docs enhancement
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 68/100
deepmodeling/deepmd-kit#5766 · 1 comment ·
Maintainers usually reply within 3 days
-
branch: master lang: py todo comment type: todo
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 72/100
deepmodeling/deepmd-kit#5480 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 3 days
-
branch: master lang: toml todo comment type: todo
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 72/100
deepmodeling/deepmd-kit#5462 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 3 days
All issues in deepmodeling/deepmd-kit
Similar issues
-
documentation good first issue priority: P2 status: ready
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 88/100
RhinoLink-Tech/data-fabric#500 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
backlog
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 78/100
EchoTools/nevr-runtime#2384 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
[Bug]: The H2 series' and the H3C's fan 3 is labelled "Chamber Fan", Bambu calls it the exhaust fanOpenarea:ui
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 88/100
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 68/100
btclib-org/btclib#3062 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
area:evals area:infra enhancement
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 74/100
jse-avl/support-bot#4 · 1 comment ·