enhance LAMMPS easyblock dynamically add ARMV81 and A64FX to Kokkos CPU mapping based on LAMMPS version + fix installation of Python bindings for LAMMPS >= 2Aug2023 + fix sanity check by doing MPI_Finalize#3036
Conversation
easybuild/easyblocks/l/lammps.py
Outdated
| 'zen3': 'ZEN3', | ||
| 'power9le': 'POWER9', | ||
| 'neoverse_n1': 'ARMV81', | ||
| 'neoverse_v1': 'ARMV81', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@laraPPr Did you check whether more recent LAMMPS versions supported better targets for neoverse_v1?
If so, we can refine this for more recent LAMMPS versions (or use a better target by default, and fall back to ARMV81 for older LAMMPS versions).
Should we also include A64FX here (which archspec should recognize as such by producing a64fx, see https://github.com/archspec/archspec-json/blob/d844bb36b21dfb9ff5d04727edfc08f592fc06af/cpu/microarchitectures.json#L2716
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Recent LAMMPS mapping is at https://docs.lammps.org/Build_extras.html#available-architecture-settings
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Added the most recent mappings but they do not seem to include better targets for neoverse_v1
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We are in a tricky situation here as you also need to update the KOKKOS_CPU_MAPPING and KOKKOS_GPU_ARCH_TABLE to match up the new architectures introduced but this has to be done in a backwards compatible way. Probably we need to allow that the values of these dictionaries may be dictionaries themselves with version keys and the appropriate return values.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should I than test this easyblock with older easyconfigs of LAMMPS to see if anything is broken?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Or update the "constants" based on the LAMMPS version in the easyblock constructor?
Maybe using constants was just wrong here, and it needs to be done via class variables like self.kokkos_cpu_mapping instead?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We could start doing something like this to update the mapping for particular versions of LAMMPS:
def update_kokkos_cpu_mapping(self):
if LooseVersion(self.cur_version) >= LooseVersion(translate_lammps_version('2Aug2023')):
self.kokkos_cpu_mapping['a64fx'] = 'A64FX'
def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):
"""LAMMPS easyblock constructor: determine whether we should build with CUDA support enabled."""
super(EB_LAMMPS, self).__init__(*args, **kwargs)
self.kokkos_cpu_mapping = copy.deepcopy(KOKKOS_CPU_MAPPING)
self.update_kokkos_cpu_mapping()and keep KOKKOS_CPU_MAPPING as is, assuming that it's correct for all LAMMPS versions we care about
ARMV81 is supported since stable_29Oct2020 it seems, see lammps/lammps@60864e3
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ARMv80, ARMv81, ARMv8-ThunderX are actually supported since stable_31Mar2017, see lammps/lammps@a9f0b7d
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ARMv8-TX2 is available since stable_29sep2021 (see lammps/lammps@39786b1) and A64FX is available since stable_29Sep2021 (see lammps/lammps@eea14c5)
easybuild/easyblocks/l/lammps.py
Outdated
| 'zen3': 'ZEN3', | ||
| 'power9le': 'POWER9', | ||
| 'neoverse_n1': 'ARMV81', | ||
| 'neoverse_v1': 'ARMV81', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We are in a tricky situation here as you also need to update the KOKKOS_CPU_MAPPING and KOKKOS_GPU_ARCH_TABLE to match up the new architectures introduced but this has to be done in a backwards compatible way. Probably we need to allow that the values of these dictionaries may be dictionaries themselves with version keys and the appropriate return values.
… scheme2Aug2023_update2
|
Test report by @laraPPr Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total) |
|
Test report by @branfosj Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)
Build succeeded for 5 out of 5 (1 easyconfigs in total) |
|
Test report by @branfosj Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)
Build succeeded for 0 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total) |
|
Test report by @branfosj Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total) |
|
Test report by @branfosj Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total) |
|
Test report by @laraPPr Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total) |
ocaisa
left a comment
ocaisa
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM, some minor edits that don't affect any of the testing to date
Co-authored-by: ocaisa <alan.ocais@cecam.org>
Co-authored-by: ocaisa <alan.ocais@cecam.org>
Co-authored-by: ocaisa <alan.ocais@cecam.org>
|
Just tested on ARM but it failed see: |
The arch detection was done correctly. So the changes made to the easybuild are not causing the failure |
|
LAMMPS now build correctly on ARM and x86_64 in EESSI: |
|
Test report by @laraPPr Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)
Build succeeded for 4 out of 4 (4 easyconfigs in total) |
|
This took a while, thanks for your patience @laraPPr ! |
boegel
changed the title
ARMV81 and A64FX to Kokkos CPU mapping based on LAMMPS version + fix installation of Python bindings for LAMMPS >= 2Aug2023ARMV81 and A64FX to Kokkos CPU mapping based on LAMMPS version + fix installation of Python bindings for LAMMPS >= 2Aug2023 + fix sanity check by doing MPI_Finalize
4 participants
No description provided.