WIP: Prevent path conflict in builds#2245
Closed
AyodeAwe wants to merge 19 commits intorapidsai:branch-24.08from
Closed
WIP: Prevent path conflict in builds#2245AyodeAwe wants to merge 19 commits intorapidsai:branch-24.08from
AyodeAwe wants to merge 19 commits intorapidsai:branch-24.08from
Conversation
jameslamb
changed the title
Member
|
This is currently failing with the following conflicts. (I've included just 1 example of each type below) (CUDA 11.8 build log) (CUDA 12.2 build log)
Described in rapidsai/rmm#1508 (comment).
And similar for all these:
|
cjnolet
added
improvement
rapids-bot bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 2, 2024
Contributes to rapidsai/build-planning#54. The `libraft-headers` and `libraft-headers-only` conda packages are bundling `rmm`'s headers. I believe that's because the `librmm` conda package isn't available in the `libraft*` conda build environment, and as a result it's getting `rmm` via CPM (thanks to `rapids-cmake`). As a result, this project and any that depend on it are seeing warnings like the following in conda builds where `conda`'s `path_conflict` setting is set to `warn` or `prevent` (like #2245): ```text This transaction has incompatible packages due to a shared path. packages: rapidsai-nightly/linux-64::librmm-24.04.00a38-cuda11_240326_ga98931b9_38, rapidsai-nightly/linux-64::libraft-headers-only-24.04.00a93-cuda11_240326_g9637b3c2_93 path: 'include/rmm/mr/device/arena_memory_resource.hpp' ``` To fix that, this proposes the following changes: * make `librmm` a `host` dependency of the following conda packages: `libraft-headers-only`, `libraft-headers` ### Benefits of this change * slightly smaller `libraft-headers` and `libraft-headers-only` conda packages * reduced risk of runtime and installation issues caused by file clobbering ## Notes for reviewers ### History of changes to the `librmm` dependency for `libraft-headers`: * both `run` and `host`: #508 * both `run` and `host`, but ignoring its `run_exports`: #1264 * just `run`, but ignoring its `run_exports`: #2102 In particular, #2102 referred to the `host` dependency on `librmm` as "extraneous" but from a packaging perspective, I don't think it is. `librmm` being in `host` means it'll be present in the build environment, which means its headers will be *found* instead of *downloaded*, and therefore not packaging into the `libraft*` conda packages. ### How I tested this Built all the `raft` conda packages locally from `branch-24.06` and confirmed that they contain `rmm` headers. Then again from this branch and confirmed they were gone. ```shell docker run \ --rm \ --env-file "${PWD}/aws-creds.env" \ -v $(pwd):/opt/work \ -w /opt/work \ -it rapidsai/ci-conda:cuda12.2.2-ubuntu22.04-py3.10-amd64 \ bash CI="true" \ ci/build_cpp.sh # On 'branch-24.06', this showed the rmm headers being packaged. # On this branch, they're omitted. tar --bzip2 -tf \ /tmp/conda-bld-output/linux-64/libraft-headers-only-24.06.00a50-cuda12_240430_g1e0e2283_50.tar.bz2 \ | grep 'include/rmm' \ | wc -l ``` Also checked the CI logs from `conda-cpp-build` jobs here. On other recent PRs, I see CPM downloading `rmm` ... ```text -- CPM: Adding package rmm@24.06 (branch-24.06) ``` ... and all the `rmm` headers getting installed as part of the `libraft-headers` package ```text -- Installing: /opt/conda/conda-bld/_h_env_placehold_placehold_..._placeho/include/rmm/cuda_stream.hpp ``` ([build link](https://github.com/rapidsai/raft/actions/runs/8904352932)) Here, I see `librmm` coming through via the conda package requirements ... ```text The following NEW packages will be INSTALLED: ... librmm: 24.06.00a17-cuda12_240430_g26fa9ecb_17 rapidsai-nightly ``` ... and being used instead of downloads via CPM ... ```text -- CPM: Using local package rmm@24.06.0 ``` ... and no installation of the `rmm` headers as part of building any `libraft` packages. ([build link](https://github.com/rapidsai/raft/actions/runs/8910675575/job/24470450187?pr=2284)) Authors: - James Lamb (https://github.com/jameslamb) Approvers: - Bradley Dice (https://github.com/bdice) - Ray Douglass (https://github.com/raydouglass) URL: #2284
Member
|
This work is paused, in favor of pursuing a better long-term solution in the future. Closing this PR for now. Subscribe to rapidsai/build-planning#54 and rapidsai/build-planning#56 for updates. |
loulankxh
pushed a commit
to loulankxh/raft
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 14, 2025
Contributes to rapidsai/build-planning#54. The `libraft-headers` and `libraft-headers-only` conda packages are bundling `rmm`'s headers. I believe that's because the `librmm` conda package isn't available in the `libraft*` conda build environment, and as a result it's getting `rmm` via CPM (thanks to `rapids-cmake`). As a result, this project and any that depend on it are seeing warnings like the following in conda builds where `conda`'s `path_conflict` setting is set to `warn` or `prevent` (like rapidsai#2245): ```text This transaction has incompatible packages due to a shared path. packages: rapidsai-nightly/linux-64::librmm-24.04.00a38-cuda11_240326_ga98931b9_38, rapidsai-nightly/linux-64::libraft-headers-only-24.04.00a93-cuda11_240326_g9637b3c2_93 path: 'include/rmm/mr/device/arena_memory_resource.hpp' ``` To fix that, this proposes the following changes: * make `librmm` a `host` dependency of the following conda packages: `libraft-headers-only`, `libraft-headers` ### Benefits of this change * slightly smaller `libraft-headers` and `libraft-headers-only` conda packages * reduced risk of runtime and installation issues caused by file clobbering ## Notes for reviewers ### History of changes to the `librmm` dependency for `libraft-headers`: * both `run` and `host`: rapidsai#508 * both `run` and `host`, but ignoring its `run_exports`: rapidsai#1264 * just `run`, but ignoring its `run_exports`: rapidsai#2102 In particular, rapidsai#2102 referred to the `host` dependency on `librmm` as "extraneous" but from a packaging perspective, I don't think it is. `librmm` being in `host` means it'll be present in the build environment, which means its headers will be *found* instead of *downloaded*, and therefore not packaging into the `libraft*` conda packages. ### How I tested this Built all the `raft` conda packages locally from `branch-24.06` and confirmed that they contain `rmm` headers. Then again from this branch and confirmed they were gone. ```shell docker run \ --rm \ --env-file "${PWD}/aws-creds.env" \ -v $(pwd):/opt/work \ -w /opt/work \ -it rapidsai/ci-conda:cuda12.2.2-ubuntu22.04-py3.10-amd64 \ bash CI="true" \ ci/build_cpp.sh # On 'branch-24.06', this showed the rmm headers being packaged. # On this branch, they're omitted. tar --bzip2 -tf \ /tmp/conda-bld-output/linux-64/libraft-headers-only-24.06.00a50-cuda12_240430_g1e0e2283_50.tar.bz2 \ | grep 'include/rmm' \ | wc -l ``` Also checked the CI logs from `conda-cpp-build` jobs here. On other recent PRs, I see CPM downloading `rmm` ... ```text -- CPM: Adding package rmm@24.06 (branch-24.06) ``` ... and all the `rmm` headers getting installed as part of the `libraft-headers` package ```text -- Installing: /opt/conda/conda-bld/_h_env_placehold_placehold_..._placeho/include/rmm/cuda_stream.hpp ``` ([build link](https://github.com/rapidsai/raft/actions/runs/8904352932)) Here, I see `librmm` coming through via the conda package requirements ... ```text The following NEW packages will be INSTALLED: ... librmm: 24.06.00a17-cuda12_240430_g26fa9ecb_17 rapidsai-nightly ``` ... and being used instead of downloads via CPM ... ```text -- CPM: Using local package rmm@24.06.0 ``` ... and no installation of the `rmm` headers as part of building any `libraft` packages. ([build link](https://github.com/rapidsai/raft/actions/runs/8910675575/job/24470450187?pr=2284)) Authors: - James Lamb (https://github.com/jameslamb) Approvers: - Bradley Dice (https://github.com/bdice) - Ray Douglass (https://github.com/raydouglass) URL: rapidsai#2284
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Contributes to rapidsai/build-planning#54
This will make builds fail when there are path conflicts