Skip to content

Add Windows build workflow in the CI. #4041

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
Mar 9, 2025
Merged

Add Windows build workflow in the CI. #4041

merged 2 commits into from
Mar 9, 2025

Conversation

sahas3
Copy link
Member

@sahas3 sahas3 commented Feb 23, 2025

  1. Adds a workflow to trigger windows build in the CI similar to the existing one for Linux to address the build CI request captured in Add a build/test workflow for Windows #3985
  2. Only non-python based LIT unit tests are enabled in the workflow due to failures reported in Python tests are failing in Windows build #4040
  3. The CI is only run against torch-nightly since python based tests are disabled. My understanding is that without the python based tests there's no need to run against the stable version too. If that's not the case, will enable stable as well. Tested that both nightly and stable versions work fine: https://github.com/sahas3/torch-mlir/actions/runs/13477124004

@sahas3 sahas3 requested review from ScottTodd and aartbik February 23, 2025 22:36
@sahas3
Copy link
Member Author

sahas3 commented Mar 5, 2025

Hi @sjarus and @justin-ngo-arm, I had to modify the TOSA filecheck tests in this PR as looks like the emission order of back to back tosa.const_shape op is not deterministic across platforms. I am not sure if that's expected but since the current plan is to not run the Windows CI in all PRs (due to build taking too long, please see the unresolved discussion) this is something that might slip through.

@sjarus sjarus requested a review from vivekkhandelwal1 March 5, 2025 18:31
@sjarus
Copy link
Collaborator

sjarus commented Mar 5, 2025

Hi @sjarus and @justin-ngo-arm, I had to modify the TOSA filecheck tests in this PR as looks like the emission order of back to back tosa.const_shape op is not deterministic across platforms. I am not sure if that's expected but since the current plan is to not run the Windows CI in all PRs (due to build taking too long, please see the unresolved discussion) this is something that might slip through.

Thanks! @justin-ngo-arm maybe we want to relax the checks to support such non determinism here ? Since we already have more robust functional testing , ordering restrictions in LIT tests are probably unnecessary.

@justin-ngo-arm
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @sjarus and @justin-ngo-arm, I had to modify the TOSA filecheck tests in this PR as looks like the emission order of back to back tosa.const_shape op is not deterministic across platforms. I am not sure if that's expected but since the current plan is to not run the Windows CI in all PRs (due to build taking too long, please see the unresolved discussion) this is something that might slip through.

Thanks! @justin-ngo-arm maybe we want to relax the checks to support such non determinism here ? Since we already have more robust functional testing , ordering restrictions in LIT tests are probably unnecessary.

Sounds good to me. I can use CHECK-DAG for tosa.const_shape in the future.

@aartbik
Copy link
Contributor

aartbik commented Mar 5, 2025

LG on sparse

Copy link
Collaborator

@sjarus sjarus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oking the TOSA LIT changes.

@sahas3 sahas3 merged commit daad812 into llvm:main Mar 9, 2025
3 checks passed
@ScottTodd
Copy link
Member

Build times so far are really good. Consistently getting high cache hit rates.

https://github.com/llvm/torch-mlir/actions/workflows/ci_windows.yml

Cold cache: 2 hours
Hot cache: 10 minutes!

This new workflow did miss a downstream Windows issue though: #4085. I'll see if I can find what is different about the build (e.g. compiler flags tested, compiler version in the workflow, differences between upstream and downstream build environment).

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.

5 participants