-
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10.8k
[NVIDIA] Unify CUTLASS version in CMakelist.txt #13846
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
Conversation
| 👋 Hi! Thank you for contributing to the vLLM project. 💬 Join our developer Slack at https://slack.vllm.ai to discuss your PR in #pr-reviews, coordinate on features in #feat- channels, or join special interest groups in #sig- channels. Just a reminder: PRs would not trigger full CI run by default. Instead, it would only run Once the PR is approved and ready to go, your PR reviewer(s) can run CI to test the changes comprehensively before merging. To run CI, PR reviewers can either: Add 🚀 |
26f849e to 9e8d068 Compare There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
cutlass GIT_REPOSITORY https://github.com/nvidia/cutlass.git # Sync with CUTLASS_REVISION variable (e.g., set elsewhere: set(CUTLASS_REVISION "v3.8.0")) GIT_TAG ${CUTLASS_REVISION} # Single dynamic tag GIT_SHALLOW TRUE # Fetch only the tag's commit, no history GIT_PROGRESS TRUE There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This needs some initializer list changes to compile, but those changes as well as the bump up to 3.8 are already in #13797, which I think we should go ahead and land
| Ah, indeed. We have applied those "initializer list changes" internally to satisfy the compiler. So, maybe we focus on #13797 and close this one? |
| Also, I like the idea by @unchained369 to use a unified variable to control the cutlass version. |
| Yep, working on getting #13797 through the CI now. I also like the suggestion of a unified variable. If somebody wants to put up a separate PR for that, I'll approve it (especially since this is at least the 2nd time that those lines have diverged) |
Signed-off-by: henrylhtsang <henrylhtsang@meta.com>
Signed-off-by: kaixih <kaixih@nvidia.com>
9e8d068 to e8904bb Compare | Repurpose the PR to unify the cutlass version in Cmakefile. Rebased it on #13797. @tlrmchlsmth PTAL. |
| This pull request has merge conflicts that must be resolved before it can be |
| This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had any activity within 90 days. It will be automatically closed if no further activity occurs within 30 days. Leave a comment if you feel this pull request should remain open. Thank you! |
| This pull request has been automatically closed due to inactivity. Please feel free to reopen if you intend to continue working on it. Thank you! |
This PR unifies the CUTLASS version to avoid duplication.