comment out imkl build dependency for FlexiBLAS 3.0.4 with GCC/11.2.0#14335
Conversation
|
@bartoldeman I wonder if we can do better here, but somehow making it easy to opt-in to building FlexiBLAS with |
| ('CMake', '3.21.1'), | ||
| ('Python', '3.9.6'), # required for running the tests | ||
| ('BLIS', '0.8.1'), | ||
| ('imkl', {'arch=x86_64': '2021.4.0', 'arch=*': False}, '', True), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@bartoldeman Rather than removing, I think we should just comment this out, so people can easily opt-in to also using imkl as a backend; see bartoldeman#4
Longter-term, we should have an easy way to opt-in to this, without having to comment out these lines.
Perhaps we can list imkl as an optional build dependency, which is only actually used if the Intel oneAPI EULA is already accepted?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Or perhaps only picking it up if it is already built...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
my idea was to let the imkl easyblock build a flexiblas compatible backend, so it can be slotted in via FLEXIBLAS_LIBRARY_PATH. This way there are no dependencies at build time.
Here's how to build a GNU-compatible backend with just imkl:
module load imkl
cat $MKLROOT/tools/builder/{blas,cblas,lapack}_example_list > user_example_list
make -f $MKLROOT/tools/builder/makefile libintel64 parallel=gnu IFACE_COMP_PART=gf name=libflexiblas_imkl
but for now the commenting out is fine
comment out use of imkl in FlexiBLAS (as opposed to removing entirely)
|
@boegelbot please test @ generoso |
|
@boegel: Request for testing this PR well received on login1 PR test command '
Test results coming soon (I hope)... Details- notification for comment with ID 978053212 processed Message to humans: this is just bookkeeping information for me, |
|
Test report by @boegelbot |
|
Test report by @boegel |
|
Going in, thanks @bartoldeman! |
(created using
eb --new-pr)closes #14332