From 23ebee46082738abd30237caf7f367f768f5ab6f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: John Melonakos Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2026 20:04:20 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] docs: clarify CI records and replace retired specification references --- .github/meeting-notes-template.rst | 14 +- .github/scripts/check_document_structure.py | 49 ++++ .github/scripts/test_document_structure.py | 38 +++ .github/workflows/docs.yml | 6 +- CONTRIBUTING.md | 5 + README.rst | 7 +- meetings/notes/2024-01-24.rst | 20 +- meetings/notes/2024-03-26.rst | 42 ++- meetings/notes/2024-04-23.rst | 16 +- meetings/notes/2024-05-28.rst | 33 ++- meetings/notes/2024-07-23.rst | 16 +- meetings/notes/2024-08-27.rst | 4 +- meetings/notes/2024-10-22.rst | 185 ++++++------ meetings/notes/2025-01-28.rst | 238 +++++++-------- meetings/notes/2025-04-22.rst | 238 +++++++-------- meetings/notes/2025-05-27.rst | 228 +++++++-------- meetings/notes/2025-06-22.rst | 274 +++++++++--------- meetings/notes/2025-07-22.rst | 274 +++++++++--------- meetings/notes/2025-08-26.rst | 262 ++++++++--------- meetings/notes/2026-02-13.rst | 184 ++++++------ meetings/notes/2026-05-18.rst | 238 +++++++-------- meetings/notes/README.rst | 12 +- .../project-ci-documentation.md | 176 +++++------ rfc/001-changing-github-org.rst | 13 +- rfc/README.rst | 5 +- 25 files changed, 1390 insertions(+), 1187 deletions(-) create mode 100644 .github/scripts/check_document_structure.py create mode 100644 .github/scripts/test_document_structure.py diff --git a/.github/meeting-notes-template.rst b/.github/meeting-notes-template.rst index 4cc1998..d8d33da 100644 --- a/.github/meeting-notes-template.rst +++ b/.github/meeting-notes-template.rst @@ -1,28 +1,28 @@ Meeting title -============= +=============== Date: YYYY-MM-DD Attendees ---------- +----------- Agenda ------- +-------- Discussion ----------- +------------ Decisions ---------- +----------- Record approved decisions separately from proposals and open questions. Actions -------- +--------- For each action, record the agreed owner, next step and target date or issue. Materials and recording ----------------------- +------------------------- Add presentation links and recording access details. Update the meeting index. diff --git a/.github/scripts/check_document_structure.py b/.github/scripts/check_document_structure.py new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d7d637f --- /dev/null +++ b/.github/scripts/check_document_structure.py @@ -0,0 +1,49 @@ +"""Validate RST rendering and coverage of dated records in sibling indexes.""" +import io +from pathlib import Path +import re +import sys +from docutils import nodes +from docutils.core import publish_doctree + + +def check(root): + errors = [] + retired = re.compile( + r'https?://(?:spec\.oneapi\.(?:com|io)|oneapi-spec\.uxlfoundation\.org)' + r'|https?://(?:github\.com|uxlfoundation\.github\.io)/[^\s<>]*' + r'(?:oneapi-spec(?:[/#?]|\b)|spec-working-group)' + r'|specification\s+working\s+group', re.IGNORECASE) + for path in root.rglob('*'): + if path.suffix not in {'.md', '.rst'} or '.git' in path.relative_to(root).parts: + continue + for number, line in enumerate(path.read_text(encoding='utf-8').splitlines(), 1): + if retired.search(line): + errors.append(f'{path.relative_to(root)}:{number}: retired specification reference; use the UXL dynamic specification') + for path in sorted(root.rglob('*.rst')): + if '.git' in path.relative_to(root).parts: + continue + source = path.read_text(encoding='utf-8') + tree = publish_doctree(source, settings_overrides={ + 'halt_level': 6, 'report_level': 5, 'warning_stream': io.StringIO(), + 'raw_enabled': False, 'file_insertion_enabled': False, + }) + for message in tree.findall(nodes.system_message): + if message['level'] >= 2: + errors.append(f'{path.relative_to(root)}:{message.get("line", "?")}: {message.astext()}') + if re.match(r'\d{4}-\d', path.name): + index = path.parent / 'README.rst' + if index.exists(): + # Match actual inline links, not incidental mentions of the filename. + links = re.findall(r'<([^<>\n]+)>`_{1,2}', index.read_text(encoding='utf-8')) + if path.name not in links: + errors.append(f'{path.relative_to(root)}: missing from {index.relative_to(root)}') + return errors + + +if __name__ == '__main__': + errors = check(Path.cwd()) + for error in errors: + print(error) + print(f'Document structure: {len(errors)} error(s).') + sys.exit(bool(errors)) diff --git a/.github/scripts/test_document_structure.py b/.github/scripts/test_document_structure.py new file mode 100644 index 0000000..f7a647c --- /dev/null +++ b/.github/scripts/test_document_structure.py @@ -0,0 +1,38 @@ +from pathlib import Path +import tempfile +import unittest +from check_document_structure import check + + +class StructureChecks(unittest.TestCase): + def test_retired_destination_and_current_specification(self): + with tempfile.TemporaryDirectory() as directory: + root = Path(directory) + page = root / 'README.md' + page.write_text('[Spec](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneAPI-spec)\n', encoding='utf-8') + self.assertTrue(any('retired specification' in e for e in check(root))) + page.write_text('[Spec](https://uxlfoundation.org/specifications/oneapi/technical-overview/)\n', encoding='utf-8') + self.assertEqual(check(root), []) + + def test_malformed_heading(self): + with tempfile.TemporaryDirectory() as directory: + root = Path(directory) + (root / 'README.rst').write_text('Long heading\n==========\n', encoding='utf-8') + self.assertTrue(check(root)) + + def test_wrong_existing_record_does_not_cover_omitted_record(self): + with tempfile.TemporaryDirectory() as directory: + root = Path(directory) + for date in ['2024-09-05', '2024-09-19']: + (root / f'{date}.rst').write_text('Meeting\n=======\n', encoding='utf-8') + index = root / 'README.rst' + index.write_text('`September 5 <2024-09-05.rst>`__\n\n' + '`September 19 <2024-09-05.rst>`__\n', encoding='utf-8') + self.assertTrue(any('2024-09-19.rst: missing' in e for e in check(root))) + index.write_text('`September 5 <2024-09-05.rst>`__\n\n' + '`September 19 <2024-09-19.rst>`__\n', encoding='utf-8') + self.assertEqual(check(root), []) + + +if __name__ == '__main__': + unittest.main() diff --git a/.github/workflows/docs.yml b/.github/workflows/docs.yml index 6051795..c058e8e 100644 --- a/.github/workflows/docs.yml +++ b/.github/workflows/docs.yml @@ -14,7 +14,11 @@ jobs: - uses: actions/checkout@11d5960a326750d5838078e36cf38b85af677262 # v4 with: persist-credentials: false - - name: Test link checker + - name: Install documentation parser + run: python3 -m pip install docutils==0.19 + - name: Test documentation checks run: python3 -m unittest discover -s .github/scripts -p 'test_*.py' - name: Check local links run: python3 .github/scripts/check_local_links.py + - name: Check document structure + run: python3 .github/scripts/check_document_structure.py diff --git a/CONTRIBUTING.md b/CONTRIBUTING.md index 6df30ca..59b5b0b 100644 --- a/CONTRIBUTING.md +++ b/CONTRIBUTING.md @@ -41,3 +41,8 @@ a new license or change governance or contribution terms. Ask foundation operations to confirm applicable terms before importing third-party material. Report security vulnerabilities through the affected project's private reporting channel or security policy, rather than posting details in a public issue. + +For rendering and meeting-index checks, install `docutils==0.19` and run +`python .github/scripts/check_document_structure.py`. The check reports malformed +reStructuredText and dated records missing from sibling indexes. External URLs +and cross-document section anchors still require review. diff --git a/README.rst b/README.rst index 2d64c8f..679e967 100644 --- a/README.rst +++ b/README.rst @@ -76,9 +76,9 @@ About this group ---------------- This repository coordinates both specification and implementation work within the -`UXL Foundation`_. The former `Specification Working Group archive`_ preserves -earlier discussions and RFCs. Current proposals belong here or in the relevant -project repository. +`UXL Foundation`_. Current specification concepts are maintained on the UXL +website, with APIs and requirements defined by each project's documentation. +Proposals belong here or in the relevant project repository. .. _`Latest meeting`: meetings/notes/2026-08-19.rst @@ -95,7 +95,6 @@ project repository. .. _`openprofile account`: https://openprofile.dev/ .. _`UXL Slack`: https://slack-invite.uxlfoundation.org/ .. _`UXL Foundation`: https://github.com/uxlfoundation/foundation -.. _`Specification Working Group archive`: https://github.com/uxlfoundation/spec-working-group .. |uxl-logo| image:: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/uxlfoundation/artwork/e98f1a7a3d305c582d02c5f532e41487b710d470/foundation/uxl-foundation-icon-color.png :alt: diff --git a/meetings/notes/2024-01-24.rst b/meetings/notes/2024-01-24.rst index 435a8f9..7f88d04 100644 --- a/meetings/notes/2024-01-24.rst +++ b/meetings/notes/2024-01-24.rst @@ -1,8 +1,8 @@ 1/24/2024 -========= +=========== Attendees: ----------- +------------ * Andrew Wafaa, Arm (Open Source Working Group chair) * Abhishek Jain, Fujitsu @@ -24,13 +24,13 @@ Attendees: * Vadim Pirogov, Intel Agenda: -------- +--------- * Present priorities for the Open Source Working Group * Discuss issues and areas for work Notes ------ +-------- The first meeting of the UXL Foundation Open Source Working Group was led by Andrew Wafaa from Arm. @@ -39,28 +39,33 @@ The group went through a set of priorities that have been provided by the UXL Steering Committee. * Build Infrastructure + * The intention of this is to bring independent builds of the projects and infrastructure in place that facilitates community contributions to the projects. * Open Source Best Practice + * The intention of this is to ensure that the projects follow the best practices of open source development so that there is a clear and frictionless way for the community to contribute to the projects. * Open Source Kernels + * The intention of this is to bring more open source code to the projects where there are opportunities to add new kernel code particularly to help target more vendors and architectures. * Architecture + * Identify opportunities to simplify projects or make it easier to support more vendor and architecture targets and also to simplify the integration of the projects with other frameworks and software, for example TensorFlow or PyTorch. * Compatibility Testing + * In order to ensure that a developer using the projects has a consistent and good experience, compatibility tests could be made available so that they can be run on different vendors and @@ -68,20 +73,23 @@ the UXL Steering Committee. * Build Infrastructure Discussion + * Due to the history of the projects the infrastructure is mostly hosted by Intel but we would like to integrate CI, build and testing for different vendor and architecture targets. Penporn from Google shared information about how this is done with the TensorFlow project: + * `Official Builds (maintained by Google)`_ + * `Community Builds (maintained by 3rd parties)`_ A similar model could be adopted for UXL Foundation projects. Options for using public cloud infrastructure for the projects include: - + * The foundation funding infrastructure (this is unlikely due to the costs involved) -* Obtaining donations of credits from public cloud infrastructure +* Obtaining donations of credits from public cloud infrastructure providers (note that donations cannot be used in lieu of membership cost) * Organisations providing infrastructure in a similar way to how Intel currently does this diff --git a/meetings/notes/2024-03-26.rst b/meetings/notes/2024-03-26.rst index 4370c00..dfd440c 100644 --- a/meetings/notes/2024-03-26.rst +++ b/meetings/notes/2024-03-26.rst @@ -5,53 +5,72 @@ John M. chaired the meeting. Andy could not attend because of travel. Attendees -========= +=========== -.. list-table:: +.. list-table:: - * - Alexey Kukanov + * - Alexey Kukanov - Intel Corporation - * - Maria Garzaran + + * - Maria Garzaran - Intel Corporation - * - Abhishek Jain + + * - Abhishek Jain - Fujitsu Limited + * - Nikolay Petrov - Intel Corporation + * - Jory Burson - The Linux Foundation + * - Kasper Mecklenburg - Arm Limited + * - Ruyman Reyes Castro - Codeplay Software + * - Ragesh Hajela - Fujitsu Limited + * - Ankit Manerikar - Intel Corporation + * - Steve Capper - Arm Limited + * - Rod Burns - Codeplay Software + * - Joel Rosenzweig - Intel Corporation + * - Roman Zhukov - Intel Corporation + * - David Edelsohn - International Business Machines Corporation + * - Stephano Cetola - Intel Corporation + * - Alison Richards - Intel Corporation + * - John Melonakos - Intel Corporation + * - Balas, DorotheeX Marie Clotilde - Intel Corporation + * - Robert Cohn - Intel Corporation + * - Pavel Kumbrasev - Intel Corporation Security: Roman Z. -================== +==================== * Roman gave an update on security * Group has formed and met once @@ -67,18 +86,25 @@ Security: Roman Z. .. _`security work package`: https://github.com/orgs/uxlfoundation/projects/3 Open Source recommendations: Rod B. -=================================== +===================================== * Rod had a follow-up discussion about the findings from looking at the `Red Hat open source checklist`_. + * `Summary spreadsheet`_ + * `oneMKL report`_ + * `oneDPL report`_ + * `oneDNN report`_ + * `oneCCL report`_ + * `oneDAL report`_ * Q: More discussion about private vs public discussion. + * Prioritize the kinds of information that other developers will need to know. Look at oneDNN RFC's as an example. @@ -95,7 +121,7 @@ Open Source recommendations: Rod B. .. _`oneDAL report`: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QRJVhcUv_JKSQmqlb43NkL37n5rliKw4 GitHub Org Transition: Robert C. -================================ +================================== * `GitHub Org Slides`_ * We have to move GitHub repos to LF/UXLF ownership diff --git a/meetings/notes/2024-04-23.rst b/meetings/notes/2024-04-23.rst index f7a35be..2a22da8 100644 --- a/meetings/notes/2024-04-23.rst +++ b/meetings/notes/2024-04-23.rst @@ -3,6 +3,14 @@ =========================== + +.. note:: + + Current guidance: the `dynamic oneAPI specification `__ + links to the concepts and project documentation maintained today. These minutes + record the discussion at the meeting date; release plans and API descriptions + below are historical. Obsolete destinations have been updated or removed. + Brief Agenda ============ @@ -52,7 +60,7 @@ RFC sketches out transition and potential issues. Each project needs to make its own plan and schedule. After discussion, it appears that Q4 is the likely target as projects will be busy with a major release. Robert is looking for a committed schedule so we can show progress towards the goal. Robert is -transitioning oneapi-spec repo to a new org now and will have some familiarity +transitioning specification hosting to a new organization and will have some familiarity with issues if you have questions. TBB & DPL teams have been discussing the transition. Robert to follow up with Timmie afterwards. @@ -117,13 +125,13 @@ Action Items: source best practices and security items. * Timmie Smith: Sync up with Robert regarding one Dpl technical questions. * Ruyman Reyes Castro: Investigate the specific issues ARM is experience - building SYCL + building SYCL Attendees ========= .. list-table:: - + * - Ruyman Reyes Castro - Codeplay Software * - peizhao @@ -163,4 +171,4 @@ Attendees * - Vadim Pirogov - Intel Corporation * - John Melonakos - - Intel Corporation \ No newline at end of file + - Intel Corporation diff --git a/meetings/notes/2024-05-28.rst b/meetings/notes/2024-05-28.rst index 4044360..4928d2e 100644 --- a/meetings/notes/2024-05-28.rst +++ b/meetings/notes/2024-05-28.rst @@ -1,10 +1,10 @@ =========================== Open Source WG: 5/28/2024 =========================== - + Brief Agenda Items -================== - +==================== + * Status updates from each project or member * Security for various projects * Update on public CI infrastructure @@ -12,23 +12,37 @@ Brief Agenda Items * Review of best practices tracker Key Discussion Points -===================== - +======================= + * Security Update Presentation + * Good job by nearly all UXL projects completed the new Security.md and enabled GitHub Vulnerability Reporting feature. oneDAL is only 1 outstanding. + * All Security Work Package members are added to security@uxlfoundation.org mailing list so that we can react on reports going through this channel as well. + * oneMKL is only 1 started to trying out Scan.Coverity (free version for open-source). Some of early results – investigating issues with building using icx – work in progress. Others – please plan this AR as well, all instructions/references are inside GitHub issues assigned for each projects. This is very important to complete to move forward. + * Upcoming ARs to the Q3 and beyond roadmap: Enable OSSF Badge, Test out CVE-Bin-Tool and more. + * Roman is working at the background to align UXL Security roadmap and Intel& industry practices. Reach out to Roman if there are any concerns, questions, or suggestions, either technical or procedural. + * Learn more: - * Security Work Package planner + + * Security Work Package planner + * Quarterly Milestones (UXL migration overall) * Public CI Infrastructure Update by Codeplay Software + * Codeplay providing funding and effort for the next 6 months + * Proof of Concept (POC) repo and documentation to be used as a template + * Aim to have UXL members contribute to hardware for testing + * Timeline: The project will start in July, with a first PoC presentation expected in September and a second in November. The final goal is to have a robust infrastructure by the end of the year. + * Assigned Liaisons: John Melonakos suggested having an assigned liaison between each project and the CI effort, similar to the security setup. Robert Cohn supported the idea. + * Detailed Plan: Aaron Dron shared more details, including secure workflow configurations, dependency management, security scanning, and sufficient hardware for external PRs. They plan to document the process and create a knowledge base. Follow-Up Actions: @@ -37,13 +51,20 @@ Follow-Up Actions: * Start an email thread to answer questions about required resources and configurations (John Melonakos). * Github.org Transition + * Transition to new Github.org for projects in progress + * Each project to move by Q4, some may be earlier + * Existing internal tools and SDL process discussions for being open-source + * Concerns about sharing runners between multiple Github organizations * Review Best Practices Tracker + * Efforts ongoing to close issues and improve project collaboration + * Work on template processes for project leadership and reviews + * Importance of having clear opportunities for community contributions Follow-Up Actions: diff --git a/meetings/notes/2024-07-23.rst b/meetings/notes/2024-07-23.rst index 0430fb8..856a39b 100644 --- a/meetings/notes/2024-07-23.rst +++ b/meetings/notes/2024-07-23.rst @@ -2,12 +2,20 @@ Open Source WG: 7/23/2024 =========================== + +.. note:: + + Current guidance: the `dynamic oneAPI specification `__ + links to the concepts and project documentation maintained today. These minutes + record the discussion at the meeting date; release plans and API descriptions + below are historical. Obsolete destinations have been updated or removed. + Recording: A recording of the meeting is available in the Linux Foundation https://openprofile.dev/ profile. If you are a member of the Working Group you can access this through your account. Meeting Minutes -=============== +================= Highlights: @@ -18,7 +26,7 @@ Highlights: hardware. Key Discussion Points: -====================== +======================== 1. Open Discussions: @@ -57,7 +65,7 @@ Key Discussion Points: * Emphasis on secure setup and guidance documentation for member-enrolled hardware systems. Action Items: -============= +=============== * Maria Garzaran: Draft and propose (the RFC utility TBD in follow-on conversations) documentation to gather feedback on oneCCL API from UXL members. @@ -65,7 +73,7 @@ Action Items: * All Members: Provide feedback on CI Proof of Concept and possible documentation repositories. Decisions/Agreements Made: -============= +============================ * The RFC process is recommended when projects have substantial changes to bring the community along in the decision-making process. diff --git a/meetings/notes/2024-08-27.rst b/meetings/notes/2024-08-27.rst index 6235552..a7f86bf 100644 --- a/meetings/notes/2024-08-27.rst +++ b/meetings/notes/2024-08-27.rst @@ -76,8 +76,8 @@ Key Discussion Points * oneMKL – https://github.com/oneapi-src/oneMKL/pull/551 (RFC to develop RFCs) * oneCCL – https://github.com/oneapi-src/oneCCL/pull/134 (RFC for new API) - * oneDPL – https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneAPI-spec/pull/564 & - https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneAPI-spec/pull/567 (not RFCs, but significant PRs) + * oneDPL – historical specification PR #564 & + historical specification PR #567 (not RFCs, but significant PRs) * Action Items: diff --git a/meetings/notes/2024-10-22.rst b/meetings/notes/2024-10-22.rst index 398ffee..c59f409 100644 --- a/meetings/notes/2024-10-22.rst +++ b/meetings/notes/2024-10-22.rst @@ -1,93 +1,92 @@ -=========================== - Open Source WG: 10/22/2024 -=========================== - -Recording: A recording of the meeting is available in the Linux Foundation https://openprofile.dev/ profile. If you are -a member of the Working Group you can access this through your account. - - -Meeting Minutes -=============== - -Summary of Main Takeaways: - -* Megan Knight joins as co-chair, bringing expertise from Linux Foundation and AWS. -* Discussions on transitioning communication tools due to accessibility issues with Slack. -* Progress updates on GitHub migration for numerous projects. -* Importance of consistent design and API guidelines emphasized. -* CI infrastructure setup progressing with availability of Intel GPU machines. - - -Key Discussion Points -===================== - -1. Welcome and Introductions: - - * Megan Knight introduced as new co-chair, highlighting her Linux Foundation and AWS background. - -2. Announcements: - - * If you are planning to attend SC'24, make sure to `register`_ for the UXL Foundation event, "Drive Open Standards - for All Accelerators," which will be held from 9:00 to 11:00 a.m. on Monday, November 18, at Chastain Room 1-2 at - the Westin Peachtree—Atlanta. - * UXL oneAPI DevSummit `replays are available`_. - -3. Open Source Projects: - - * Nikolay Petrov: Discussed plans to integrate scikit-learn wrappers for oneDAL under the UXL umbrella; naming - discussions ongoing. He will present this proposal this Thursday in the AI SIG. - -4. Communications Tools: - - * Rod Burns: Slack inaccessibility issues raised; exploring alternatives. - * Suggested tools include GitHub discussions, Gitter, and mailing lists. - -5. Best Practices and Migration Progress: (`slides`_) - - * Kenopen-source alignment and sharing unified guidelines. - * Projects progressing with best practices implementation. - * Here is the status of each project in moving to GitHub under the UXL Foundation: - - * oneMKL - no blockers; plans to complete the renaming work and then transition to UXLF GitHub - * oneDNN - - * oneDPL - no blockers; will wrap up best practices and then transition to UXLF GitHub - * oneTBB - no blockers; will wrap up best practices and then transition to UXLF GitHub - * oneDAL - no blockers; waiting to figure out scikit-learn plans and then transition to UXLF GitHub - * oneCCL - - -6. Feedback on Current RFCs: - - * oneCCL – the `C API Design Document (RFC)`_ is available for review - * oneMKL – - - * The `RFC for renaming`_ was merged. Now, work is in progress for the actual implementation. - * `PR for the spec`_ - * `PR for the open-source project`_ - - * oneDPL – - - * `oneDPL formal RFC documents`_ - * `RFC GitHub discussions`_ - -7. CI Infrastructure Updates: - - * Aaron: Progress in setting up Intel GPU machines for CI within UXL. - - -Action Items -============ - -* Rod Burns: Explore communication tool alternatives and report back. -* John Melonakos: Circulate meeting minutes and ensure project leads update on GitHub migration. -* Aaron: Finalize CI infrastructure setup and address identified issues. - - -.. _`register`: https://linuxfoundation.regfox.com/uxl-foundation-at-sc-24 -.. _`replays are available`: https://oneapi.io/events/oneapi-devsummit-hosted-by-uxl-foundation/ -.. _`slides`: ../presentations/2024-10-22-Recommendations-for-design-of-oneAPI-libraries.pptx -.. _`C API Design Document (RFC)`: https://github.com/oneapi-src/oneCCL/tree/rfcs/rfcs/20240806-c-api -.. _`RFC for renaming`: https://github.com/oneapi-src/oneMKL/pull/564 -.. _`PR for the spec`: https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneAPI-spec/pull/596 -.. _`PR for the open-source project`: https://github.com/oneapi-src/oneMKL/pull/602 -.. _`oneDPL formal RFC documents`: https://github.com/oneapi-src/oneDPL/tree/main/rfcs -.. _`RFC GitHub discussions`: https://github.com/oneapi-src/oneDPL/discussions?discussions_q=is%3Aopen+label%3ARFC +=========================== + Open Source WG: 10/22/2024 +=========================== + +Recording: A recording of the meeting is available in the Linux Foundation https://openprofile.dev/ profile. If you are +a member of the Working Group you can access this through your account. + + +Meeting Minutes +=============== + +Summary of Main Takeaways: + +* Megan Knight joins as co-chair, bringing expertise from Linux Foundation and AWS. +* Discussions on transitioning communication tools due to accessibility issues with Slack. +* Progress updates on GitHub migration for numerous projects. +* Importance of consistent design and API guidelines emphasized. +* CI infrastructure setup progressing with availability of Intel GPU machines. + + +Key Discussion Points +===================== + +1. Welcome and Introductions: + + * Megan Knight introduced as new co-chair, highlighting her Linux Foundation and AWS background. + +2. Announcements: + + * If you are planning to attend SC'24, make sure to `register`_ for the UXL Foundation event, "Drive Open Standards + for All Accelerators," which will be held from 9:00 to 11:00 a.m. on Monday, November 18, at Chastain Room 1-2 at + the Westin Peachtree—Atlanta. + * UXL oneAPI DevSummit `replays are available`_. + +3. Open Source Projects: + + * Nikolay Petrov: Discussed plans to integrate scikit-learn wrappers for oneDAL under the UXL umbrella; naming + discussions ongoing. He will present this proposal this Thursday in the AI SIG. + +4. Communications Tools: + + * Rod Burns: Slack inaccessibility issues raised; exploring alternatives. + * Suggested tools include GitHub discussions, Gitter, and mailing lists. + +5. Best Practices and Migration Progress: (`slides`_) + + * Kenopen-source alignment and sharing unified guidelines. + * Projects progressing with best practices implementation. + * Here is the status of each project in moving to GitHub under the UXL Foundation: + + * oneMKL - no blockers; plans to complete the renaming work and then transition to UXLF GitHub + * oneDNN - + * oneDPL - no blockers; will wrap up best practices and then transition to UXLF GitHub + * oneTBB - no blockers; will wrap up best practices and then transition to UXLF GitHub + * oneDAL - no blockers; waiting to figure out scikit-learn plans and then transition to UXLF GitHub + * oneCCL - + +6. Feedback on Current RFCs: + + * oneCCL – the `C API Design Document (RFC)`_ is available for review + * oneMKL – + + * The `RFC for renaming`_ was merged. Now, work is in progress for the actual implementation. + * Historical specification PR #596 (reference only) + * `PR for the open-source project`_ + + * oneDPL – + + * `oneDPL formal RFC documents`_ + * `RFC GitHub discussions`_ + +7. CI Infrastructure Updates: + + * Aaron: Progress in setting up Intel GPU machines for CI within UXL. + + +Action Items +============ + +* Rod Burns: Explore communication tool alternatives and report back. +* John Melonakos: Circulate meeting minutes and ensure project leads update on GitHub migration. +* Aaron: Finalize CI infrastructure setup and address identified issues. + + +.. _`register`: https://linuxfoundation.regfox.com/uxl-foundation-at-sc-24 +.. _`replays are available`: https://oneapi.io/events/oneapi-devsummit-hosted-by-uxl-foundation/ +.. _`slides`: ../presentations/2024-10-22-Recommendations-for-design-of-oneAPI-libraries.pptx +.. _`C API Design Document (RFC)`: https://github.com/oneapi-src/oneCCL/tree/rfcs/rfcs/20240806-c-api +.. _`RFC for renaming`: https://github.com/oneapi-src/oneMKL/pull/564 +.. _`PR for the open-source project`: https://github.com/oneapi-src/oneMKL/pull/602 +.. _`oneDPL formal RFC documents`: https://github.com/oneapi-src/oneDPL/tree/main/rfcs +.. _`RFC GitHub discussions`: https://github.com/oneapi-src/oneDPL/discussions?discussions_q=is%3Aopen+label%3ARFC diff --git a/meetings/notes/2025-01-28.rst b/meetings/notes/2025-01-28.rst index 20cd98d..48d5ebc 100644 --- a/meetings/notes/2025-01-28.rst +++ b/meetings/notes/2025-01-28.rst @@ -1,115 +1,123 @@ -=========================== - Open Source WG: 01/28/2025 -=========================== - -Recording: A recording of the meeting is available in the Linux Foundation https://openprofile.dev/ profile. If you are -a member of the Working Group you can access this through your account. - - -Clarifying Meeting Time and Release Schedule -============================================ - -The meeting began with a discussion about the confusion regarding the meeting time, which was later clarified by -Melissa. The team also discussed the new AI-enabled feature in their meetings, which was enabled for the current -meeting. Megan then introduced the agenda for the meeting, which included updates on the spec release schedule, Google -Summer of Code opportunities, and a security status update. John then reviewed the release schedule for the -specification, noting that they typically do provisional releases in September and final versions in November and -December. Rod suggested the possibility of more frequent releases if needed, and Nikolay agreed with the current -schedule. - -oneDAL API Specification Limitations -==================================== - -Nikolay explained that the current specification for oneDAL covers less than 10% of the API, as there has been no -external demand or interest in expanding it. The team primarily develops the spec for internal use, focusing on -essential elements and implementation details. John and Maria discuss the purpose and importance of having a -comprehensive specification, with Maria emphasizing its value for standardization. Nikolay acknowledges that while a -broader spec would be ideal, the lack of interest from other parties and the resource-intensive nature of creating specs -have limited its development. - -Spec Updates and Release Schedules -================================== - -John, Mourad, and Maria discussed the status and future of the spec, with Mourad confirming that the current spec -matches the features in oneDNN 3.0, but with some extensions in the API. They agreed on a systematic approach to -updating the spec, with experimental features being moved to the spec once mature. The team also discussed the schedule -for major and provisional releases per year, which was deemed suitable. Maria suggested cleaning up the spec when moving -to new versions. The team also discussed the need for more feedback on the spec from member companies. Rod proposed a -follow-up discussion on how different projects are working with the spec. - -Google Summer of Code Project Discussion -======================================== - -Rod discussed the Google Summer of Code project, an open-source initiative where volunteers work on various projects -over the summer. He expressed interest in applying again this year and sought input from the team on potential projects -they could contribute to. Rod emphasized that the ideas list should be high-level and not a detailed requirements list, -as individual volunteers would submit their own applications describing their contributions. He also mentioned that the -project duration could be between 90 and 120 hours, and encouraged team members to consider getting involved. Rod -promised to send a Google Summer of Code guide for further reference. - -Project Deadline and Guide Discussion -===================================== - -Rod informed the team about a project deadline on February 11th, urging them to start thinking about it soon. He also -mentioned that he would send a guide and that Victor, his colleague, could answer any questions about the project. Megan -asked about the deadline for specific projects, to which Rod responded that the 11th was the ultimate deadline, and he -would prefer to receive information by the 5th. Aaron was then scheduled to update the team on CI. - -Github Usage and Future Plans (`slides`_) -========================================= - -Aaron discussed the current state of their Github usage, including the availability of free self-hosted runners and the -recent addition of ARM runners by Github. He mentioned the ongoing testing of AWS-hosted Graviton runners and the active -systems provided by Intel Tiber AI Cloud. Aaron also highlighted the potential for upgrading their Github membership to -a higher tier for increased concurrent builds and the ongoing pursuit of NVIDIA runners. He detailed the use of Github -ARC for Kubernetes clusters and the testing of GPU systems, noting some caveats such as Linux-only and no docker -support. Aaron also mentioned the need for more test hardware, a CPU-only test system, and a dedicated multi-GPU system, -as well as the need to handle driver updates and the consideration of minimal viable testing. - -UXL Project Contributions and Security -====================================== - -Aaron discussed the process of public contributions and PRs for UXL projects, emphasizing the need for public testing -before accepting a PR. He also mentioned the ongoing work towards enabling all UXL projects to accept contributions -safely. Megan thanked Aaron for the update and brought up a security status issue. John announced Roman's departure from -Intel and suggested individual project security management. Rod agreed to discuss open security issues with the projects -and document security policies in a non-public GitHub repo. John proposed making this an agenda item for the next -meeting. - -Creating High-Level Roadmap for Projects -======================================== - -The meeting revolved around the idea of creating a high-level roadmap for the year, covering major milestones or feature -releases for the projects. Megan suggested that this could be beneficial for contributors to see the direction of the -projects and potentially increase the contributor base. Rod agreed, mentioning that they had discussed this idea over -email. Mourad shared that they already have a release roadmap available on their Github project, which includes a list -of issues to be solved for each release. The team discussed the possibility of standardizing this across all -projects. John mentioned an exciting contribution from SiPearl for an ARM backend for oneMath. Andrey confirmed that -they try to keep their spec up to date with the oneMath API, adding new features to the spec before adding them to their -open-source project. - -Improving Project Planning and Collaboration -============================================ - -The team discussed the progress of various projects and the need for better forward planning. They considered conducting -an inventory of the projects on the mailing list to assess their current status and identify gaps. The idea of -facilitating collaboration between project needs and member companies was also discussed, with suggestions for -educational or training sessions. The team agreed on the importance of promoting the collaborative effort and the -projects to member companies. The possibility of hosting more meetings or creating video shorts for social media was -also considered. - -Next steps -========== - -* Rod to send around the Google Summer of Code guide to project members. -* Project members to consider getting involved in Google Summer of Code and submit ideas list to Rod by February 5th. -* Aaron to continue testing Github-provided ARM runners for CI. -* Aaron to work on a process for driver updates on CI test systems. -* Rod to document security contacts for each project in the operations Github repo. -* John to add security policy review as an agenda item for the next meeting. -* Megan to create an inventory of project roadmap processes via mailing list. -* Rod to explore opportunities for UXL projects to present at member companies' internal meetings. -* Megan to consider creating video shorts about UXL projects for social media. - - -.. _`slides`: ../presentations/2025-01-28-UXLCIPoC.pdf +=========================== + Open Source WG: 01/28/2025 +=========================== + + +.. note:: + + Current guidance: the `dynamic oneAPI specification `__ + links to the concepts and project documentation maintained today. These minutes + record the discussion at the meeting date; release plans and API descriptions + below are historical. Obsolete destinations have been updated or removed. + +Recording: A recording of the meeting is available in the Linux Foundation https://openprofile.dev/ profile. If you are +a member of the Working Group you can access this through your account. + + +Clarifying Meeting Time and Release Schedule +============================================ + +The meeting began with a discussion about the confusion regarding the meeting time, which was later clarified by +Melissa. The team also discussed the new AI-enabled feature in their meetings, which was enabled for the current +meeting. Megan then introduced the agenda for the meeting, which included updates on the spec release schedule, Google +Summer of Code opportunities, and a security status update. John then reviewed the release schedule for the +specification, noting that they typically do provisional releases in September and final versions in November and +December. Rod suggested the possibility of more frequent releases if needed, and Nikolay agreed with the current +schedule. + +oneDAL API Specification Limitations +==================================== + +Nikolay explained that the current specification for oneDAL covers less than 10% of the API, as there has been no +external demand or interest in expanding it. The team primarily develops the spec for internal use, focusing on +essential elements and implementation details. John and Maria discuss the purpose and importance of having a +comprehensive specification, with Maria emphasizing its value for standardization. Nikolay acknowledges that while a +broader spec would be ideal, the lack of interest from other parties and the resource-intensive nature of creating specs +have limited its development. + +Spec Updates and Release Schedules +================================== + +John, Mourad, and Maria discussed the status and future of the spec, with Mourad confirming that the current spec +matches the features in oneDNN 3.0, but with some extensions in the API. They agreed on a systematic approach to +updating the spec, with experimental features being moved to the spec once mature. The team also discussed the schedule +for major and provisional releases per year, which was deemed suitable. Maria suggested cleaning up the spec when moving +to new versions. The team also discussed the need for more feedback on the spec from member companies. Rod proposed a +follow-up discussion on how different projects are working with the spec. + +Google Summer of Code Project Discussion +======================================== + +Rod discussed the Google Summer of Code project, an open-source initiative where volunteers work on various projects +over the summer. He expressed interest in applying again this year and sought input from the team on potential projects +they could contribute to. Rod emphasized that the ideas list should be high-level and not a detailed requirements list, +as individual volunteers would submit their own applications describing their contributions. He also mentioned that the +project duration could be between 90 and 120 hours, and encouraged team members to consider getting involved. Rod +promised to send a Google Summer of Code guide for further reference. + +Project Deadline and Guide Discussion +===================================== + +Rod informed the team about a project deadline on February 11th, urging them to start thinking about it soon. He also +mentioned that he would send a guide and that Victor, his colleague, could answer any questions about the project. Megan +asked about the deadline for specific projects, to which Rod responded that the 11th was the ultimate deadline, and he +would prefer to receive information by the 5th. Aaron was then scheduled to update the team on CI. + +Github Usage and Future Plans (`slides`_) +========================================= + +Aaron discussed the current state of their Github usage, including the availability of free self-hosted runners and the +recent addition of ARM runners by Github. He mentioned the ongoing testing of AWS-hosted Graviton runners and the active +systems provided by Intel Tiber AI Cloud. Aaron also highlighted the potential for upgrading their Github membership to +a higher tier for increased concurrent builds and the ongoing pursuit of NVIDIA runners. He detailed the use of Github +ARC for Kubernetes clusters and the testing of GPU systems, noting some caveats such as Linux-only and no docker +support. Aaron also mentioned the need for more test hardware, a CPU-only test system, and a dedicated multi-GPU system, +as well as the need to handle driver updates and the consideration of minimal viable testing. + +UXL Project Contributions and Security +====================================== + +Aaron discussed the process of public contributions and PRs for UXL projects, emphasizing the need for public testing +before accepting a PR. He also mentioned the ongoing work towards enabling all UXL projects to accept contributions +safely. Megan thanked Aaron for the update and brought up a security status issue. John announced Roman's departure from +Intel and suggested individual project security management. Rod agreed to discuss open security issues with the projects +and document security policies in a non-public GitHub repo. John proposed making this an agenda item for the next +meeting. + +Creating High-Level Roadmap for Projects +======================================== + +The meeting revolved around the idea of creating a high-level roadmap for the year, covering major milestones or feature +releases for the projects. Megan suggested that this could be beneficial for contributors to see the direction of the +projects and potentially increase the contributor base. Rod agreed, mentioning that they had discussed this idea over +email. Mourad shared that they already have a release roadmap available on their Github project, which includes a list +of issues to be solved for each release. The team discussed the possibility of standardizing this across all +projects. John mentioned an exciting contribution from SiPearl for an ARM backend for oneMath. Andrey confirmed that +they try to keep their spec up to date with the oneMath API, adding new features to the spec before adding them to their +open-source project. + +Improving Project Planning and Collaboration +============================================ + +The team discussed the progress of various projects and the need for better forward planning. They considered conducting +an inventory of the projects on the mailing list to assess their current status and identify gaps. The idea of +facilitating collaboration between project needs and member companies was also discussed, with suggestions for +educational or training sessions. The team agreed on the importance of promoting the collaborative effort and the +projects to member companies. The possibility of hosting more meetings or creating video shorts for social media was +also considered. + +Next steps +========== + +* Rod to send around the Google Summer of Code guide to project members. +* Project members to consider getting involved in Google Summer of Code and submit ideas list to Rod by February 5th. +* Aaron to continue testing Github-provided ARM runners for CI. +* Aaron to work on a process for driver updates on CI test systems. +* Rod to document security contacts for each project in the operations Github repo. +* John to add security policy review as an agenda item for the next meeting. +* Megan to create an inventory of project roadmap processes via mailing list. +* Rod to explore opportunities for UXL projects to present at member companies' internal meetings. +* Megan to consider creating video shorts about UXL projects for social media. + + +.. _`slides`: ../presentations/2025-01-28-UXLCIPoC.pdf diff --git a/meetings/notes/2025-04-22.rst b/meetings/notes/2025-04-22.rst index 71aff89..0e1a018 100644 --- a/meetings/notes/2025-04-22.rst +++ b/meetings/notes/2025-04-22.rst @@ -1,119 +1,119 @@ -=========================== - Open Source WG: 04/22/2025 -=========================== - -Recording: A recording of the meeting is available in the Linux Foundation https://openprofile.dev/ profile. If you are -a member of the Working Group you can access this through your account. - -Attendees -========= - -* Deepika H V - Centre for Development of Advanced Computing - -* Rod Burns - Codeplay -* Kumudha Narasimhan - Codeplay -* Aaron Dron - Codeplay - -* Ragesh Hajela - Fujitsu - -* Kevan Ahmadi - Imagination Technologies -* Ed Tuke - Imagination Technologies - -* Maria Kraynyuk - Intel -* Vadim Pirogov - Intel -* Maria Petrova - Intel -* Vasudha Badri-Paul - Intel -* Alison Richards - Intel -* Maria Garzaran - Intel -* Timmie Smith - Intel -* John Melonakos - Intel -* Nikolay Petrov - Intel -* Konstantin Boyarinov - Intel -* Andrey Fedorov - Intel -* Mike Voss - Intel - -* Melissa Aranzamendez - The Linux Foundation - -Next Steps -========== - -* All projects to review and update their project CI documentation in the open source working group repo. -* Aaron and team to continue working on documentation for CI infrastructure. -* Rod and John to have a separate meeting about expanding the UXL Foundation GitHub organization's README and structure. -* All projects to check and ensure documentation links are easily findable on their project pages. -* Alison to collect and review marketing materials from all projects to identify gaps and plan next steps. -* All project members to mention UXL Foundation and oneAPI in conference talks and tag them in social media posts. -* John to arrange for Vasanth to present his CPU inclusivity proposal at the next meeting. -* Rod to ensure relevant member organization representatives are present for Vasanth's presentation on CPU inclusivity. - -Security Work Package Breakdown Discussion (`slides`_) -========================================== - -Aaron discussed the security work package breakdown, noting that most projects still have items in the in progress -column. He asked for feedback on any issues with Coverity or OSS-Fuzz, and mentioned that the oneAPI Construction Kit -and scikit-learn-intelex projects were behind on their work packages. Mike expressed that his team was not prioritizing -fuzz testing due to the high effort required. Aaron suggested that the security work packages could be closed if they -are not relevant, but also noted that some issues might not come up again. He proposed using the OpenSSF Scorecard as a -guidance for future directions and suggested that the security contacts and other stakeholders should regularly review -and discuss it. - -UXL Project Dashboard and Maintainer Selection (`slides`_) -============================================== - -Aaron provides an update on several topics related to the UXL project. He discusses a dashboard implemented by an -engineer to show GitHub organization scores, and recommends running scorecards within projects rather than relying on -external workflows. Aaron raises the question of establishing a default process for maintainer selection and suggests -using UXL membership to create a basic chain of trust. He also proposes creating a master list of GitHub accounts and -their organizational affiliations to improve user management. Regarding CI, Aaron reports that ARM runners are working -well, but Intel GPU Max runners are currently unstable due to a location change. He mentions that there may be some -downtime for these runners until the migration is complete. - -Standardizing Project Infrastructure and Documentation (`slides`_) -====================================================== - -Aaron discussed the need for standardization in project infrastructure and the importance of documenting testing -processes. He mentioned the development of two new runner runners and the need for more documentation. Rod suggested -reviewing the information in the Github repo to ensure it's up-to-date and accurate. Aaron also discussed the -possibility of using Conda Forge for binary releases and the need for a standard UXL release process. Timmie asked about -the level of detail required in the CI infrastructure documentation, and Aaron responded that while specific hardware -details may not be necessary, software versions and compatibility should be included. - -UXL Roadmap Progress and Future Plans -===================================== - -John discussed the progress of the UXL roadmap, noting that three projects had responded, while one project was not at -1.0 yet and lacked a defined roadmap. John also mentioned that some projects had shared their feedback in chat -messages. Maria clarified that they had listed milestones on Github but not specific issues to be addressed. Mike added -that they were starting to apply milestones to their RFCs, issues, and PRs. John suggested a separate meeting to discuss -the UXL Foundation Github organization and how to expand the roadmap. Rod agreed to this. John also mentioned the -potential merger of two working groups (Spec and Open-source). - -Intel Project Documentation and Marketing Strategy -================================================== - -In the meeting, the team discussed the organization of their projects, specifically focusing on the Intel projects that -have been moved to the UXL Foundation. They discussed the need for a unified way to direct users to the documentation -for each project. Rod suggested a review of each project to ensure that documentation is easily accessible. The team -also discussed the creation of a 'get started' page to link everything together. Alison proposed the creation of a -presentation or video to provide a quick understanding of each project, its value proposition, and how to get -started. The team agreed to collect all marketing materials for the projects in the next month to identify gaps and plan -for the future. - -Expanding CPU Support in UXL -============================ - -John presented an idea to improve CPU inclusivity in the UXL libraries, which was originally proposed by Vasanth to -Qualcomm and ARM. The current UXL specifications focus on accelerator offloading, but John suggests expanding support -for CPUs to address the fragmented CPU landscape with its many competing interfaces. Vadim expresses uncertainty about -the claim of CPU landscape fragmentation, prompting John to clarify. - -John proposed a strategy to add an abstraction layer that insulates the hardware community from rapid software -innovation. This layer would allow for years of stable API while including CPU backends as well as accelerator -backends. The proposal was to create a C API specification in the policy layer, which would decide whether to use the -C++ API or a plugin API. The idea was to support CPUs in a structured way in their libraries. However, the team was -unsure about the problem statement and the benefits of this proposal. - -John agreed to bring in Vasanth to explain the proposal in more detail. - - -.. _`slides`: ../presentations/2025-04-22-UXLCIPoC.pdf +============================ + Open Source WG: 04/22/2025 +============================ + +Recording: A recording of the meeting is available in the Linux Foundation https://openprofile.dev/ profile. If you are +a member of the Working Group you can access this through your account. + +Attendees +=========== + +* Deepika H V - Centre for Development of Advanced Computing + +* Rod Burns - Codeplay +* Kumudha Narasimhan - Codeplay +* Aaron Dron - Codeplay + +* Ragesh Hajela - Fujitsu + +* Kevan Ahmadi - Imagination Technologies +* Ed Tuke - Imagination Technologies + +* Maria Kraynyuk - Intel +* Vadim Pirogov - Intel +* Maria Petrova - Intel +* Vasudha Badri-Paul - Intel +* Alison Richards - Intel +* Maria Garzaran - Intel +* Timmie Smith - Intel +* John Melonakos - Intel +* Nikolay Petrov - Intel +* Konstantin Boyarinov - Intel +* Andrey Fedorov - Intel +* Mike Voss - Intel + +* Melissa Aranzamendez - The Linux Foundation + +Next Steps +============ + +* All projects to review and update their project CI documentation in the open source working group repo. +* Aaron and team to continue working on documentation for CI infrastructure. +* Rod and John to have a separate meeting about expanding the UXL Foundation GitHub organization's README and structure. +* All projects to check and ensure documentation links are easily findable on their project pages. +* Alison to collect and review marketing materials from all projects to identify gaps and plan next steps. +* All project members to mention UXL Foundation and oneAPI in conference talks and tag them in social media posts. +* John to arrange for Vasanth to present his CPU inclusivity proposal at the next meeting. +* Rod to ensure relevant member organization representatives are present for Vasanth's presentation on CPU inclusivity. + +Security Work Package Breakdown Discussion (`slides`_) +======================================================== + +Aaron discussed the security work package breakdown, noting that most projects still have items in the in progress +column. He asked for feedback on any issues with Coverity or OSS-Fuzz, and mentioned that the oneAPI Construction Kit +and scikit-learn-intelex projects were behind on their work packages. Mike expressed that his team was not prioritizing +fuzz testing due to the high effort required. Aaron suggested that the security work packages could be closed if they +are not relevant, but also noted that some issues might not come up again. He proposed using the OpenSSF Scorecard as a +guidance for future directions and suggested that the security contacts and other stakeholders should regularly review +and discuss it. + +UXL Project Dashboard and Maintainer Selection (`slides`_) +============================================================ + +Aaron provides an update on several topics related to the UXL project. He discusses a dashboard implemented by an +engineer to show GitHub organization scores, and recommends running scorecards within projects rather than relying on +external workflows. Aaron raises the question of establishing a default process for maintainer selection and suggests +using UXL membership to create a basic chain of trust. He also proposes creating a master list of GitHub accounts and +their organizational affiliations to improve user management. Regarding CI, Aaron reports that ARM runners are working +well, but Intel GPU Max runners are currently unstable due to a location change. He mentions that there may be some +downtime for these runners until the migration is complete. + +Standardizing Project Infrastructure and Documentation (`slides`_) +==================================================================== + +Aaron discussed the need for standardization in project infrastructure and the importance of documenting testing +processes. He mentioned the development of two new runner runners and the need for more documentation. Rod suggested +reviewing the information in the Github repo to ensure it's up-to-date and accurate. Aaron also discussed the +possibility of using Conda Forge for binary releases and the need for a standard UXL release process. Timmie asked about +the level of detail required in the CI infrastructure documentation, and Aaron responded that while specific hardware +details may not be necessary, software versions and compatibility should be included. + +UXL Roadmap Progress and Future Plans +======================================= + +John discussed the progress of the UXL roadmap, noting that three projects had responded, while one project was not at +1.0 yet and lacked a defined roadmap. John also mentioned that some projects had shared their feedback in chat +messages. Maria clarified that they had listed milestones on Github but not specific issues to be addressed. Mike added +that they were starting to apply milestones to their RFCs, issues, and PRs. John suggested a separate meeting to discuss +the UXL Foundation Github organization and how to expand the roadmap. Rod agreed to this. John also mentioned the +potential merger of two working groups (Spec and Open-source). + +Intel Project Documentation and Marketing Strategy +==================================================== + +In the meeting, the team discussed the organization of their projects, specifically focusing on the Intel projects that +have been moved to the UXL Foundation. They discussed the need for a unified way to direct users to the documentation +for each project. Rod suggested a review of each project to ensure that documentation is easily accessible. The team +also discussed the creation of a 'get started' page to link everything together. Alison proposed the creation of a +presentation or video to provide a quick understanding of each project, its value proposition, and how to get +started. The team agreed to collect all marketing materials for the projects in the next month to identify gaps and plan +for the future. + +Expanding CPU Support in UXL +============================== + +John presented an idea to improve CPU inclusivity in the UXL libraries, which was originally proposed by Vasanth to +Qualcomm and ARM. The current UXL specifications focus on accelerator offloading, but John suggests expanding support +for CPUs to address the fragmented CPU landscape with its many competing interfaces. Vadim expresses uncertainty about +the claim of CPU landscape fragmentation, prompting John to clarify. + +John proposed a strategy to add an abstraction layer that insulates the hardware community from rapid software +innovation. This layer would allow for years of stable API while including CPU backends as well as accelerator +backends. The proposal was to create a C API specification in the policy layer, which would decide whether to use the +C++ API or a plugin API. The idea was to support CPUs in a structured way in their libraries. However, the team was +unsure about the problem statement and the benefits of this proposal. + +John agreed to bring in Vasanth to explain the proposal in more detail. + + +.. _`slides`: ../presentations/2025-04-22-UXLCIPoC.pdf diff --git a/meetings/notes/2025-05-27.rst b/meetings/notes/2025-05-27.rst index 5fbdddf..0a4d2ea 100644 --- a/meetings/notes/2025-05-27.rst +++ b/meetings/notes/2025-05-27.rst @@ -1,114 +1,114 @@ -========================== -Open Source WG: 05/27/2025 -========================== - -Recording: A recording of the meeting is available in the Linux Foundation https://openprofile.dev/ profile. If you are -a member of the Working Group you can access this through your account. - -Attendees -========= - -* Megan Knight - Arm -* Nick Dingle - Arm - -* Aaron Dron - Codeplay -* Rod Burns - Codeplay - -* Ragesh Hajela - Fujitsu - -* Kevan Ahmadi - Imagination Technologies - -* Michael Voss - Intel -* John Melonakos - Intel -* Timmie Smith - Intel -* Maria Petrova - Intel -* Alexey Kukanov - Intel -* Mourad Gouicem - Intel -* Nikolay Petrov - Intel -* Augustin Degomme - Intel -* Vasanth Tovinkere - Intel -* Maria Kraynyuk - Intel -* Alison Richards - Intel - -* Roman Zhukov - Red Hat - -* Biagio Cosenza - University of Salerno - - -Next Steps -========== - -* John to send out Vasanth's presentation slides to the group. (see below) -* John to set up a GitHub discussion thread for further conversation on CPU inclusivity and the C API specification. -* John to reach out to Qualcomm to rekindle the discussion on CPU inclusivity and compiler leveraging. -* John to organize a focused discussion with the oneAPI Math (oneMKL) team on specific domains (BLAS, LAPACK, FFT, RNG) - regarding CPU inclusivity. -* John to reach out to software ISVs to participate in the GitHub discussion on CPU inclusivity. -* John to share the sanctions discussion topic with Larry at Intel and bring it up in the next meeting. -* Mike to send the Linux Foundation discussion link about sanctions to John and Megan via email. - -Summary - -Security Work Package Progress Review (`UXL community infrastructure slides`_) -===================================== - -Rod presented on security work package progress, noting that most issues had been resolved or moved to the "in progress" -column. He highlighted Coverity and OSS Fuzz as potential pain points, particularly regarding Google account -requirements for OSS Fuzz, and mentioned that a guide was being developed to assist users. - -Security Testing Flexibility for Projects -========================================= - -The team discussed security and quality testing approaches for UXL Foundation projects, agreeing that projects can -determine their own priorities on a case-by-case basis rather than having a unified set of rules. They decided to share -best practices and positive experiences from different projects rather than establishing one-size-fits-all requirements -for static analysis. The group also addressed questions about security email responses, maintainer selection processes, -and external testing requirements, with Megan suggesting they review OpenSSF materials for guidance on maintainer -selection. Rod noted that while current OpenSSF scorecard scores were decent, security representatives should review -their current threats and next steps, potentially through Slack discussions. - -Hardware Runners Status and Planning -==================================== - -Rod discussed the status of various hardware runners, noting that the Codeplay host runner would go offline in a few -days but that the free ARM runners were now available. He mentioned three in-progress runners from Codeplay and Intel, -including the BattleMage B580 and Nvidia H100, with Intel planning to provide more B580s. Rod also highlighted the -completion of the Intel GPU Max 1550 migration and thanked projects for providing infrastructure requirements. He -identified gaps in testing, such as PowerPC and RISC-V requirements, and suggested potential solutions like emulation or -hardware options. Rod also mentioned exploring Common Forge for binary releases and ongoing discussions with Intel about -packaging DPC++. He encouraged further conversations about release planning and naming strategies. - -API CPU Inclusivity Customer Concerns (`CPU-inclusive C API slides`_) -===================================== - -Vasanth presented on customer pain points regarding API specifications, particularly around CPU inclusivity and library -support. Customers expressed concerns about the need to accommodate both CPU and accelerator paths, with questions about -default targets and fallback mechanisms. The discussion highlighted the desire for a stable abstraction layer that would -allow software innovation while providing hardware vendors with a consistent API to implement. Customers requested CPU -inclusivity as a first-order discussion, with a preference for reference implementations and the ability to set -different policy settings for different libraries, while also emphasizing the importance of conformance tests. - -Math and Imaging Library Proposals -================================== - -Vasanth discussed the primary requests regarding math and imaging libraries, noting that 80-90% of the requests centered -around math functions, with the remaining 20% focusing on imaging library specifications. He explained that discussions -had culminated in proposals to form work groups at the UXL level to address these issues. Maria asked about the -programming model for C API, particularly in relation to offloading tasks to GPUs and accelerators. Vasanth clarified -that the initial pain point was resistance to changing existing C APIs to a new specification that required queuing and -target selection, which software vendors found burdensome. He emphasized the need for a unified abstraction that would -reduce workload and allow incremental implementation by hardware vendors, with a fallback option to CPU for seamless -integration and testing. - -Compiler Support for CPU Inclusivity -==================================== - -The meeting focused on discussing compiler support for CPU inclusivity, particularly for oneMath projects. Vasanth -shared feedback from various stakeholders, including Qualcomm, who expressed interest in leveraging the compiler for -specific work. The group agreed to create a GitHub discussion thread to continue the conversation and gather input from -those who couldn't attend. - - - -.. _`UXL community infrastructure slides`: ../presentations/2025-05-27-UXLCIPoC.pdf -.. _`CPU-inclusive C API slides`: ../presentations/2025-05-27-UXL-Library-brainstorm.pptx +============================ +Open Source WG: 05/27/2025 +============================ + +Recording: A recording of the meeting is available in the Linux Foundation https://openprofile.dev/ profile. If you are +a member of the Working Group you can access this through your account. + +Attendees +=========== + +* Megan Knight - Arm +* Nick Dingle - Arm + +* Aaron Dron - Codeplay +* Rod Burns - Codeplay + +* Ragesh Hajela - Fujitsu + +* Kevan Ahmadi - Imagination Technologies + +* Michael Voss - Intel +* John Melonakos - Intel +* Timmie Smith - Intel +* Maria Petrova - Intel +* Alexey Kukanov - Intel +* Mourad Gouicem - Intel +* Nikolay Petrov - Intel +* Augustin Degomme - Intel +* Vasanth Tovinkere - Intel +* Maria Kraynyuk - Intel +* Alison Richards - Intel + +* Roman Zhukov - Red Hat + +* Biagio Cosenza - University of Salerno + + +Next Steps +============ + +* John to send out Vasanth's presentation slides to the group. (see below) +* John to set up a GitHub discussion thread for further conversation on CPU inclusivity and the C API specification. +* John to reach out to Qualcomm to rekindle the discussion on CPU inclusivity and compiler leveraging. +* John to organize a focused discussion with the oneAPI Math (oneMKL) team on specific domains (BLAS, LAPACK, FFT, RNG) + regarding CPU inclusivity. +* John to reach out to software ISVs to participate in the GitHub discussion on CPU inclusivity. +* John to share the sanctions discussion topic with Larry at Intel and bring it up in the next meeting. +* Mike to send the Linux Foundation discussion link about sanctions to John and Megan via email. + +Summary + +Security Work Package Progress Review (`UXL community infrastructure slides`_) +================================================================================ + +Rod presented on security work package progress, noting that most issues had been resolved or moved to the "in progress" +column. He highlighted Coverity and OSS Fuzz as potential pain points, particularly regarding Google account +requirements for OSS Fuzz, and mentioned that a guide was being developed to assist users. + +Security Testing Flexibility for Projects +=========================================== + +The team discussed security and quality testing approaches for UXL Foundation projects, agreeing that projects can +determine their own priorities on a case-by-case basis rather than having a unified set of rules. They decided to share +best practices and positive experiences from different projects rather than establishing one-size-fits-all requirements +for static analysis. The group also addressed questions about security email responses, maintainer selection processes, +and external testing requirements, with Megan suggesting they review OpenSSF materials for guidance on maintainer +selection. Rod noted that while current OpenSSF scorecard scores were decent, security representatives should review +their current threats and next steps, potentially through Slack discussions. + +Hardware Runners Status and Planning +====================================== + +Rod discussed the status of various hardware runners, noting that the Codeplay host runner would go offline in a few +days but that the free ARM runners were now available. He mentioned three in-progress runners from Codeplay and Intel, +including the BattleMage B580 and Nvidia H100, with Intel planning to provide more B580s. Rod also highlighted the +completion of the Intel GPU Max 1550 migration and thanked projects for providing infrastructure requirements. He +identified gaps in testing, such as PowerPC and RISC-V requirements, and suggested potential solutions like emulation or +hardware options. Rod also mentioned exploring Common Forge for binary releases and ongoing discussions with Intel about +packaging DPC++. He encouraged further conversations about release planning and naming strategies. + +API CPU Inclusivity Customer Concerns (`CPU-inclusive C API slides`_) +======================================================================= + +Vasanth presented on customer pain points regarding API specifications, particularly around CPU inclusivity and library +support. Customers expressed concerns about the need to accommodate both CPU and accelerator paths, with questions about +default targets and fallback mechanisms. The discussion highlighted the desire for a stable abstraction layer that would +allow software innovation while providing hardware vendors with a consistent API to implement. Customers requested CPU +inclusivity as a first-order discussion, with a preference for reference implementations and the ability to set +different policy settings for different libraries, while also emphasizing the importance of conformance tests. + +Math and Imaging Library Proposals +==================================== + +Vasanth discussed the primary requests regarding math and imaging libraries, noting that 80-90% of the requests centered +around math functions, with the remaining 20% focusing on imaging library specifications. He explained that discussions +had culminated in proposals to form work groups at the UXL level to address these issues. Maria asked about the +programming model for C API, particularly in relation to offloading tasks to GPUs and accelerators. Vasanth clarified +that the initial pain point was resistance to changing existing C APIs to a new specification that required queuing and +target selection, which software vendors found burdensome. He emphasized the need for a unified abstraction that would +reduce workload and allow incremental implementation by hardware vendors, with a fallback option to CPU for seamless +integration and testing. + +Compiler Support for CPU Inclusivity +====================================== + +The meeting focused on discussing compiler support for CPU inclusivity, particularly for oneMath projects. Vasanth +shared feedback from various stakeholders, including Qualcomm, who expressed interest in leveraging the compiler for +specific work. The group agreed to create a GitHub discussion thread to continue the conversation and gather input from +those who couldn't attend. + + + +.. _`UXL community infrastructure slides`: ../presentations/2025-05-27-UXLCIPoC.pdf +.. _`CPU-inclusive C API slides`: ../presentations/2025-05-27-UXL-Library-brainstorm.pptx diff --git a/meetings/notes/2025-06-22.rst b/meetings/notes/2025-06-22.rst index e8bf7f1..a936035 100644 --- a/meetings/notes/2025-06-22.rst +++ b/meetings/notes/2025-06-22.rst @@ -1,134 +1,140 @@ -========================== -Open Source WG: 06/22/2025 -========================== - -Recording: A recording of the meeting is available in the Linux Foundation https://openprofile.dev/ profile. If you are -a member of the Working Group you can access this through your account. - -Attendees -========= - -* Megan Knight - Arm - -* Kuldeep Pal - C-DAC - -* Rod Burns - Codeplay - -* Abhishek Jain - Fujitsu - -* Ed Tuke - Imagination Technologies - -* Irina Topinskaia - Intel -* John Melonakos - Intel -* Andrey Fedorov - Intel -* Nikolay Petrov - Intel -* Mike Voss - Intel -* Mourad Gouicem - Intel -* Maria Petrova - Intel -* Timmie Smith - Intel -* Alexey Kukanov - Intel -* Aleksandr Solovev - Intel -* Vasudha Badri-Paul - Intel -* Ian Faust - Intel - - -Quick Recap -=========== - -The meeting began with introductions and agenda setting, followed by discussions about OFAC sanctions and updates from -various open source projects. The team reviewed upcoming releases across multiple projects including oneDNN, oneDPL, and -oneCCL, with specific focus on new features and performance improvements. The conversation ended with reminders about -sharing work through presentations at upcoming events and thanks to participants. - -Next Steps -========== - -* Megan to reach out to OpenSSF security experts for guidance on implementing OFAC sanctions compliance -* Megan to discuss OFAC sanctions implementation with Dolan and Rod -* Megan to add OFAC sanctions discussion to next OpenSSF working group meeting agenda (scheduled for next Tuesday) -* Megan to follow up with JDF contacts regarding OFAC sanctions guidance -* Mourad to update release timeline for 3.9 release (potentially delayed due to PyTorch dependencies) -* Maria to deliver patches for Battlemage and Arc GPU support -* Maria to prepare patches for PyTorch 1.16 release (targeted for mid-August) -* Maria to implement new C API design for 21.17 release (as non-default option) -* Rod to send Open Source Summit recording links to meeting attendees -* Rod to share Dev Summit call for presentations with meeting attendees - -Summary -======= - -OFAC Sanctions and Project Updates: -=================================== - -The meeting began with Megan introducing herself and the agenda, which included a focus on OFAC sanctions and updates -from open source projects. Rod confirmed that the recordings from the Mini summit were published and agreed to send them -out. The group discussed the OFAC sanctions issue raised by Michael Voss, with Michael providing an overview of the -topic and emphasizing that he is not a lawyer. The conversation ended with a reminder for participants to add any -additional agenda items to the chat or to Megan and John. - -Sanctions Compliance and Legal Implications: -============================================ - -Mike explained the legal implications of sanctions against specially designated nationals, noting that US citizens and -organizations must comply with these rules worldwide, even if unaware of violations. He highlighted that the rules -impose strict liability, meaning any infractions can result in fines or criminal penalties, and emphasized that -ownership of 50% or more by sanctioned individuals or organizations can also trigger sanctions. - -Open Source Contribution Policy Challenges: -=========================================== - -Mike raised concerns about the challenges of enforcing contribution policies for open source projects, particularly -regarding unsolicited patches and two-way engagement with individuals or organizations on restricted lists. Megan -acknowledged these issues and suggested exploring guidance from the Linux Foundation and OpenSSF, noting the need for -unified policies across projects. She proposed taking the lead on this matter, including consulting with OpenSSF's -security experts and discussing it with the operations team, to find practical solutions for identity management and -contribution verification. - -oneDNN Updates: -=============== - -Mourad reported on oneDNN, mentioning a release candidate for 3.9 expected at the end of the week, with potential delays -due to new features and PyTorch's schedule. They also noted interest from the Barcelona supercomputing group in adding -RISC-V capabilities. - -oneMath Updates: -================ - -Andrey said oneMath did not have much of a update. The are focused on maintenance releases at the moment. - -oneDAL Updates: -=============== - -Ian and Aleksandr ("Sasha") provided updates on oneDAL, mentioning bug fixes and preparation for the 2025.3 release in -November. - -oneTBB Updates: -=============== - -Mike shared that oneTBB's next release in 2022.3 would focus on improvements to the tasking API, requested by the visual -effects community. The team agreed that monthly releases generally work well for them, allowing for better feedback on -dependencies. - -oneDPL Updates: -=============== - -The team discussed the status and development of oneDPL, a portable library for CPUs, which currently sees primarily -Intel-related usage. Timmie reported ongoing work on range-based APIs for parallel algorithms and GPU performance -improvements, particularly for set operation algorithms. Alexey explained that oneDPL's CPU support serves as an -upstream source for the C++ standard library's parallel algorithms, though this relationship has recently become less -active. - -oneCCL Updates: -=============== - -Maria provided updates on CCL, noting their work on supporting Battle Match ARB-PE and PyTorch upstream, with plans for -a patch release in mid-August and a major release in October that will include a new C API design as a non-default -option. - -Dev Summit Presentation Submissions Discussion: -=============================================== - -The meeting was shorter than usual due to the summer season, with Aaron absent from the office. Rod requested that John -share videos from the Open Source Summit and a link to the Call for Presentations for the upcoming Dev summit. John -encouraged all projects to submit presentations, emphasizing the importance of sharing their work within the -foundation. The conversation ended with thanks from Megan and the participants. +============================ +Open Source WG: 06/22/2025 +============================ + +.. note:: + + Record verification pending: the body of these notes matches + `2025-07-22 <2025-07-22.rst>`__ apart from the meeting date. Both records + are preserved while the original calendar or recording is checked. + +Recording: A recording of the meeting is available in the Linux Foundation https://openprofile.dev/ profile. If you are +a member of the Working Group you can access this through your account. + +Attendees +=========== + +* Megan Knight - Arm + +* Kuldeep Pal - C-DAC + +* Rod Burns - Codeplay + +* Abhishek Jain - Fujitsu + +* Ed Tuke - Imagination Technologies + +* Irina Topinskaia - Intel +* John Melonakos - Intel +* Andrey Fedorov - Intel +* Nikolay Petrov - Intel +* Mike Voss - Intel +* Mourad Gouicem - Intel +* Maria Petrova - Intel +* Timmie Smith - Intel +* Alexey Kukanov - Intel +* Aleksandr Solovev - Intel +* Vasudha Badri-Paul - Intel +* Ian Faust - Intel + + +Quick Recap +============= + +The meeting began with introductions and agenda setting, followed by discussions about OFAC sanctions and updates from +various open source projects. The team reviewed upcoming releases across multiple projects including oneDNN, oneDPL, and +oneCCL, with specific focus on new features and performance improvements. The conversation ended with reminders about +sharing work through presentations at upcoming events and thanks to participants. + +Next Steps +============ + +* Megan to reach out to OpenSSF security experts for guidance on implementing OFAC sanctions compliance +* Megan to discuss OFAC sanctions implementation with Dolan and Rod +* Megan to add OFAC sanctions discussion to next OpenSSF working group meeting agenda (scheduled for next Tuesday) +* Megan to follow up with JDF contacts regarding OFAC sanctions guidance +* Mourad to update release timeline for 3.9 release (potentially delayed due to PyTorch dependencies) +* Maria to deliver patches for Battlemage and Arc GPU support +* Maria to prepare patches for PyTorch 1.16 release (targeted for mid-August) +* Maria to implement new C API design for 21.17 release (as non-default option) +* Rod to send Open Source Summit recording links to meeting attendees +* Rod to share Dev Summit call for presentations with meeting attendees + +Summary +========= + +OFAC Sanctions and Project Updates: +===================================== + +The meeting began with Megan introducing herself and the agenda, which included a focus on OFAC sanctions and updates +from open source projects. Rod confirmed that the recordings from the Mini summit were published and agreed to send them +out. The group discussed the OFAC sanctions issue raised by Michael Voss, with Michael providing an overview of the +topic and emphasizing that he is not a lawyer. The conversation ended with a reminder for participants to add any +additional agenda items to the chat or to Megan and John. + +Sanctions Compliance and Legal Implications: +============================================== + +Mike explained the legal implications of sanctions against specially designated nationals, noting that US citizens and +organizations must comply with these rules worldwide, even if unaware of violations. He highlighted that the rules +impose strict liability, meaning any infractions can result in fines or criminal penalties, and emphasized that +ownership of 50% or more by sanctioned individuals or organizations can also trigger sanctions. + +Open Source Contribution Policy Challenges: +============================================= + +Mike raised concerns about the challenges of enforcing contribution policies for open source projects, particularly +regarding unsolicited patches and two-way engagement with individuals or organizations on restricted lists. Megan +acknowledged these issues and suggested exploring guidance from the Linux Foundation and OpenSSF, noting the need for +unified policies across projects. She proposed taking the lead on this matter, including consulting with OpenSSF's +security experts and discussing it with the operations team, to find practical solutions for identity management and +contribution verification. + +oneDNN Updates: +================= + +Mourad reported on oneDNN, mentioning a release candidate for 3.9 expected at the end of the week, with potential delays +due to new features and PyTorch's schedule. They also noted interest from the Barcelona supercomputing group in adding +RISC-V capabilities. + +oneMath Updates: +================== + +Andrey said oneMath did not have much of a update. The are focused on maintenance releases at the moment. + +oneDAL Updates: +================= + +Ian and Aleksandr ("Sasha") provided updates on oneDAL, mentioning bug fixes and preparation for the 2025.3 release in +November. + +oneTBB Updates: +================= + +Mike shared that oneTBB's next release in 2022.3 would focus on improvements to the tasking API, requested by the visual +effects community. The team agreed that monthly releases generally work well for them, allowing for better feedback on +dependencies. + +oneDPL Updates: +================= + +The team discussed the status and development of oneDPL, a portable library for CPUs, which currently sees primarily +Intel-related usage. Timmie reported ongoing work on range-based APIs for parallel algorithms and GPU performance +improvements, particularly for set operation algorithms. Alexey explained that oneDPL's CPU support serves as an +upstream source for the C++ standard library's parallel algorithms, though this relationship has recently become less +active. + +oneCCL Updates: +================= + +Maria provided updates on CCL, noting their work on supporting Battle Match ARB-PE and PyTorch upstream, with plans for +a patch release in mid-August and a major release in October that will include a new C API design as a non-default +option. + +Dev Summit Presentation Submissions Discussion: +================================================= + +The meeting was shorter than usual due to the summer season, with Aaron absent from the office. Rod requested that John +share videos from the Open Source Summit and a link to the Call for Presentations for the upcoming Dev summit. John +encouraged all projects to submit presentations, emphasizing the importance of sharing their work within the +foundation. The conversation ended with thanks from Megan and the participants. diff --git a/meetings/notes/2025-07-22.rst b/meetings/notes/2025-07-22.rst index 60ecfb5..775421e 100644 --- a/meetings/notes/2025-07-22.rst +++ b/meetings/notes/2025-07-22.rst @@ -1,134 +1,140 @@ -========================== -Open Source WG: 07/22/2025 -========================== - -Recording: A recording of the meeting is available in the Linux Foundation https://openprofile.dev/ profile. If you are -a member of the Working Group you can access this through your account. - -Attendees -========= - -* Megan Knight - Arm - -* Kuldeep Pal - C-DAC - -* Rod Burns - Codeplay - -* Abhishek Jain - Fujitsu - -* Ed Tuke - Imagination Technologies - -* Irina Topinskaia - Intel -* John Melonakos - Intel -* Andrey Fedorov - Intel -* Nikolay Petrov - Intel -* Mike Voss - Intel -* Mourad Gouicem - Intel -* Maria Petrova - Intel -* Timmie Smith - Intel -* Alexey Kukanov - Intel -* Aleksandr Solovev - Intel -* Vasudha Badri-Paul - Intel -* Ian Faust - Intel - - -Quick Recap -=========== - -The meeting began with introductions and agenda setting, followed by discussions about OFAC sanctions and updates from -various open source projects. The team reviewed upcoming releases across multiple projects including oneDNN, oneDPL, and -oneCCL, with specific focus on new features and performance improvements. The conversation ended with reminders about -sharing work through presentations at upcoming events and thanks to participants. - -Next Steps -========== - -* Megan to reach out to OpenSSF security experts for guidance on implementing OFAC sanctions compliance -* Megan to discuss OFAC sanctions implementation with Dolan and Rod -* Megan to add OFAC sanctions discussion to next OpenSSF working group meeting agenda (scheduled for next Tuesday) -* Megan to follow up with JDF contacts regarding OFAC sanctions guidance -* Mourad to update release timeline for 3.9 release (potentially delayed due to PyTorch dependencies) -* Maria to deliver patches for Battlemage and Arc GPU support -* Maria to prepare patches for PyTorch 1.16 release (targeted for mid-August) -* Maria to implement new C API design for 21.17 release (as non-default option) -* Rod to send Open Source Summit recording links to meeting attendees -* Rod to share Dev Summit call for presentations with meeting attendees - -Summary -======= - -OFAC Sanctions and Project Updates: -=================================== - -The meeting began with Megan introducing herself and the agenda, which included a focus on OFAC sanctions and updates -from open source projects. Rod confirmed that the recordings from the Mini summit were published and agreed to send them -out. The group discussed the OFAC sanctions issue raised by Michael Voss, with Michael providing an overview of the -topic and emphasizing that he is not a lawyer. The conversation ended with a reminder for participants to add any -additional agenda items to the chat or to Megan and John. - -Sanctions Compliance and Legal Implications: -============================================ - -Mike explained the legal implications of sanctions against specially designated nationals, noting that US citizens and -organizations must comply with these rules worldwide, even if unaware of violations. He highlighted that the rules -impose strict liability, meaning any infractions can result in fines or criminal penalties, and emphasized that -ownership of 50% or more by sanctioned individuals or organizations can also trigger sanctions. - -Open Source Contribution Policy Challenges: -=========================================== - -Mike raised concerns about the challenges of enforcing contribution policies for open source projects, particularly -regarding unsolicited patches and two-way engagement with individuals or organizations on restricted lists. Megan -acknowledged these issues and suggested exploring guidance from the Linux Foundation and OpenSSF, noting the need for -unified policies across projects. She proposed taking the lead on this matter, including consulting with OpenSSF's -security experts and discussing it with the operations team, to find practical solutions for identity management and -contribution verification. - -oneDNN Updates: -=============== - -Mourad reported on oneDNN, mentioning a release candidate for 3.9 expected at the end of the week, with potential delays -due to new features and PyTorch's schedule. They also noted interest from the Barcelona supercomputing group in adding -RISC-V capabilities. - -oneMath Updates: -================ - -Andrey said oneMath did not have much of a update. The are focused on maintenance releases at the moment. - -oneDAL Updates: -=============== - -Ian and Aleksandr ("Sasha") provided updates on oneDAL, mentioning bug fixes and preparation for the 2025.3 release in -November. - -oneTBB Updates: -=============== - -Mike shared that oneTBB's next release in 2022.3 would focus on improvements to the tasking API, requested by the visual -effects community. The team agreed that monthly releases generally work well for them, allowing for better feedback on -dependencies. - -oneDPL Updates: -=============== - -The team discussed the status and development of oneDPL, a portable library for CPUs, which currently sees primarily -Intel-related usage. Timmie reported ongoing work on range-based APIs for parallel algorithms and GPU performance -improvements, particularly for set operation algorithms. Alexey explained that oneDPL's CPU support serves as an -upstream source for the C++ standard library's parallel algorithms, though this relationship has recently become less -active. - -oneCCL Updates: -=============== - -Maria provided updates on CCL, noting their work on supporting Battle Match ARB-PE and PyTorch upstream, with plans for -a patch release in mid-August and a major release in October that will include a new C API design as a non-default -option. - -Dev Summit Presentation Submissions Discussion: -=============================================== - -The meeting was shorter than usual due to the summer season, with Aaron absent from the office. Rod requested that John -share videos from the Open Source Summit and a link to the Call for Presentations for the upcoming Dev summit. John -encouraged all projects to submit presentations, emphasizing the importance of sharing their work within the -foundation. The conversation ended with thanks from Megan and the participants. +============================ +Open Source WG: 07/22/2025 +============================ + +.. note:: + + Record verification pending: the body of these notes matches + `2025-06-22 <2025-06-22.rst>`__ apart from the meeting date. Both records + are preserved while the original calendar or recording is checked. + +Recording: A recording of the meeting is available in the Linux Foundation https://openprofile.dev/ profile. If you are +a member of the Working Group you can access this through your account. + +Attendees +=========== + +* Megan Knight - Arm + +* Kuldeep Pal - C-DAC + +* Rod Burns - Codeplay + +* Abhishek Jain - Fujitsu + +* Ed Tuke - Imagination Technologies + +* Irina Topinskaia - Intel +* John Melonakos - Intel +* Andrey Fedorov - Intel +* Nikolay Petrov - Intel +* Mike Voss - Intel +* Mourad Gouicem - Intel +* Maria Petrova - Intel +* Timmie Smith - Intel +* Alexey Kukanov - Intel +* Aleksandr Solovev - Intel +* Vasudha Badri-Paul - Intel +* Ian Faust - Intel + + +Quick Recap +============= + +The meeting began with introductions and agenda setting, followed by discussions about OFAC sanctions and updates from +various open source projects. The team reviewed upcoming releases across multiple projects including oneDNN, oneDPL, and +oneCCL, with specific focus on new features and performance improvements. The conversation ended with reminders about +sharing work through presentations at upcoming events and thanks to participants. + +Next Steps +============ + +* Megan to reach out to OpenSSF security experts for guidance on implementing OFAC sanctions compliance +* Megan to discuss OFAC sanctions implementation with Dolan and Rod +* Megan to add OFAC sanctions discussion to next OpenSSF working group meeting agenda (scheduled for next Tuesday) +* Megan to follow up with JDF contacts regarding OFAC sanctions guidance +* Mourad to update release timeline for 3.9 release (potentially delayed due to PyTorch dependencies) +* Maria to deliver patches for Battlemage and Arc GPU support +* Maria to prepare patches for PyTorch 1.16 release (targeted for mid-August) +* Maria to implement new C API design for 21.17 release (as non-default option) +* Rod to send Open Source Summit recording links to meeting attendees +* Rod to share Dev Summit call for presentations with meeting attendees + +Summary +========= + +OFAC Sanctions and Project Updates: +===================================== + +The meeting began with Megan introducing herself and the agenda, which included a focus on OFAC sanctions and updates +from open source projects. Rod confirmed that the recordings from the Mini summit were published and agreed to send them +out. The group discussed the OFAC sanctions issue raised by Michael Voss, with Michael providing an overview of the +topic and emphasizing that he is not a lawyer. The conversation ended with a reminder for participants to add any +additional agenda items to the chat or to Megan and John. + +Sanctions Compliance and Legal Implications: +============================================== + +Mike explained the legal implications of sanctions against specially designated nationals, noting that US citizens and +organizations must comply with these rules worldwide, even if unaware of violations. He highlighted that the rules +impose strict liability, meaning any infractions can result in fines or criminal penalties, and emphasized that +ownership of 50% or more by sanctioned individuals or organizations can also trigger sanctions. + +Open Source Contribution Policy Challenges: +============================================= + +Mike raised concerns about the challenges of enforcing contribution policies for open source projects, particularly +regarding unsolicited patches and two-way engagement with individuals or organizations on restricted lists. Megan +acknowledged these issues and suggested exploring guidance from the Linux Foundation and OpenSSF, noting the need for +unified policies across projects. She proposed taking the lead on this matter, including consulting with OpenSSF's +security experts and discussing it with the operations team, to find practical solutions for identity management and +contribution verification. + +oneDNN Updates: +================= + +Mourad reported on oneDNN, mentioning a release candidate for 3.9 expected at the end of the week, with potential delays +due to new features and PyTorch's schedule. They also noted interest from the Barcelona supercomputing group in adding +RISC-V capabilities. + +oneMath Updates: +================== + +Andrey said oneMath did not have much of a update. The are focused on maintenance releases at the moment. + +oneDAL Updates: +================= + +Ian and Aleksandr ("Sasha") provided updates on oneDAL, mentioning bug fixes and preparation for the 2025.3 release in +November. + +oneTBB Updates: +================= + +Mike shared that oneTBB's next release in 2022.3 would focus on improvements to the tasking API, requested by the visual +effects community. The team agreed that monthly releases generally work well for them, allowing for better feedback on +dependencies. + +oneDPL Updates: +================= + +The team discussed the status and development of oneDPL, a portable library for CPUs, which currently sees primarily +Intel-related usage. Timmie reported ongoing work on range-based APIs for parallel algorithms and GPU performance +improvements, particularly for set operation algorithms. Alexey explained that oneDPL's CPU support serves as an +upstream source for the C++ standard library's parallel algorithms, though this relationship has recently become less +active. + +oneCCL Updates: +================= + +Maria provided updates on CCL, noting their work on supporting Battle Match ARB-PE and PyTorch upstream, with plans for +a patch release in mid-August and a major release in October that will include a new C API design as a non-default +option. + +Dev Summit Presentation Submissions Discussion: +================================================= + +The meeting was shorter than usual due to the summer season, with Aaron absent from the office. Rod requested that John +share videos from the Open Source Summit and a link to the Call for Presentations for the upcoming Dev summit. John +encouraged all projects to submit presentations, emphasizing the importance of sharing their work within the +foundation. The conversation ended with thanks from Megan and the participants. diff --git a/meetings/notes/2025-08-26.rst b/meetings/notes/2025-08-26.rst index bf0f297..da15da3 100644 --- a/meetings/notes/2025-08-26.rst +++ b/meetings/notes/2025-08-26.rst @@ -1,131 +1,131 @@ -========================== -Open Source WG: 08/26/2025 -========================== - -Recording: A recording of the meeting is available in the Linux Foundation https://openprofile.dev/ profile. If you are -a member of the Working Group you can access this through your account. - -Attendees -========= - -* Deepika H V - C-DAC -* Kuldeep Pal - C-DAC - -* Rod Burns - Codeplay - -* John Melonakos - Intel -* Timmie Smith - Intel -* Alison Richards - Intel -* Nikolay Petrov - Intel -* Mourad Gouicem - Intel -* Vadim Pirogov - Intel -* Andrey Fedorov - Intel -* Michael Voss - Intel - -* Melissa Aranzamendez - Linux Foundation - -* Biagio Cosenza - University of Salerno - - -Quick Recap -=========== - -The meeting focused on the transition of UXL Foundations' engineering infrastructure responsibilities, as Aaron can no -longer maintain it, with John and Rod reaching out to member companies to gauge interest in taking over these -duties. Rod presented updates on the current state of CI infrastructure and discussed the need for new hardware hosting, -GPU testing capabilities, and GitHub organization administrators. The team reviewed project updates and discussed -upcoming events, including a virtual dev summit and potential face-to-face meeting in Bangalore. - -Next Steps -========== - -* Member companies to consider volunteering for GitHub organization administrator roles and email John and Megan if - interested. -* Member companies to explore options for providing GPU machines for public CI infrastructure and email John and Megan - if able to help. -* Codeplay team to publish documentation for CI infrastructure handover. -* John to update the working group README with current project milestones. -* Project leads to update their project milestone pages for John's reference. -* John to reach out to member companies individually about transferring CI infrastructure responsibilities. -* Project teams to consider promoting the upcoming virtual dev summit on September 17th to their networks. - -Summary -======= - -UXL Infrastructure Transfer Discussion: (`slides`_) -======================================= - -The meeting discussed the transfer of UXL Foundations' engineering infrastructure responsibilities, as Aaron is no -longer able to maintain it. John and Rod shared that they are reaching out to member companies to gauge their interest -and capacity to take on this responsibility. Rod presented slides to outline the current state of the CI infrastructure -and planned to discuss further details with the team. - -CI Infrastructure Transition Challenges: -======================================== - -Rod discussed the current state of CI (Continuous Integration) for the foundation's repositories. He explained that -while some basic CI exists, primarily in Intel's infrastructure, the goal is to have public CI that can validate -projects independently. Rod mentioned that projects have listed their CI requirements on a GitHub page and that a -tracking board exists for open CI-related items. He also noted that Aaron has been the administrator for the GitHub -organization and has been working with Codeplay to document CI setup and establish infrastructure. However, Rod revealed -that Codeplay can no longer continue these activities, as Aaron is no longer able to act as the admin, and Robert has -stepped back from his roles in the steering committee and as a spec editor. - -Hardware and CI Resource Changes: -================================= - -Rod discussed the changes in available hardware and CI resources, noting that Intel's Tiber cloud and GPU Max machines -are no longer accessible. He emphasized the need to find new ways to host hardware for various projects, secure -workflows, and maintain a knowledge base. Rod highlighted the importance of GPU testing capabilities, which are -currently missing, and called for contributions to add runners and hardware. The team is seeking organizations or -individuals to help with these activities moving forward. - -Public CI Infrastructure Transition Plan: -========================================= - -Rod discussed the transition of public CI infrastructure and the need for GitHub organization administrators. He -emphasized the importance of finding a new owner for establishing public CI and sourcing GPU machines for testing. Rod -also explained the roles and responsibilities of GitHub repository administrators, including managing user permissions -and security incident reports. He called for volunteers to help with these tasks and encouraged members to apply for -additional CI resources through the Linux Foundation or other providers. - -Infrastructure Changes and Workflow Impact: -=========================================== - -The team discussed infrastructure changes and their impact on workflows. Rod confirmed that most removed experimental -projects were not in active use, and the only ongoing project using their infrastructure is the oneDNN project, which -runs tests on separate machines and posts results publicly. Hamza explained that while some projects use ARM runners, -Github now offers public ARM runners on their cobalt platform, though these are not guaranteed to have specific -architectures and have had recent issues with Microsoft's architecture changes. - -Centralized Infrastructure Planning Discussion: -=============================================== - -The group discussed the need for a centralized infrastructure to support their projects, with John emphasizing that it -should be customer-driven and coordinated by a central body. Hamza and Rod clarified that the long-term plan involves -shared resources that projects can access, though the exact implementation details are still being worked out. John -requested that other member companies volunteer to help host projects and that attendees take the initiative to -coordinate infrastructure within their organizations. - -Project Updates and Backend Progress: -===================================== - -The team reviewed updates across various projects. Nikolay mentioned no specific updates for his project, while John -planned to update the working group's README and milestone information. Andrey reported that the ARM CPU backend was -enabled for the SFT domain and an RFC was opened to support the OpenBLAS backend. Mike shared that they were working -towards their next release with a code freeze approaching, which would include an improved tasking API. Timmie also -reported progress, mentioning their upcoming milestone with additional range-based APIs and improved algorithm -performance. - -Virtual Dev Summit Planning Discussion: -======================================= - -The team discussed an upcoming virtual dev summit on September 17th, featuring a keynote from Fujitsu and other -presenters. Alison encouraged everyone to register and share the event with their communities, noting that UXL has a -newsletter and social media presence for outreach. John inquired about community communication methods, and Alison -mentioned the UXL newsletter and web/social media channels. The team also briefly discussed plans for a face-to-face -event in Bangalore in Q4, with Megan working on the details. - - - -.. _`slides`: ../presentations/2025-08-26-UXL-Working-Group-CI-Transition.pdf +============================ +Open Source WG: 08/26/2025 +============================ + +Recording: A recording of the meeting is available in the Linux Foundation https://openprofile.dev/ profile. If you are +a member of the Working Group you can access this through your account. + +Attendees +=========== + +* Deepika H V - C-DAC +* Kuldeep Pal - C-DAC + +* Rod Burns - Codeplay + +* John Melonakos - Intel +* Timmie Smith - Intel +* Alison Richards - Intel +* Nikolay Petrov - Intel +* Mourad Gouicem - Intel +* Vadim Pirogov - Intel +* Andrey Fedorov - Intel +* Michael Voss - Intel + +* Melissa Aranzamendez - Linux Foundation + +* Biagio Cosenza - University of Salerno + + +Quick Recap +============= + +The meeting focused on the transition of UXL Foundations' engineering infrastructure responsibilities, as Aaron can no +longer maintain it, with John and Rod reaching out to member companies to gauge interest in taking over these +duties. Rod presented updates on the current state of CI infrastructure and discussed the need for new hardware hosting, +GPU testing capabilities, and GitHub organization administrators. The team reviewed project updates and discussed +upcoming events, including a virtual dev summit and potential face-to-face meeting in Bangalore. + +Next Steps +============ + +* Member companies to consider volunteering for GitHub organization administrator roles and email John and Megan if + interested. +* Member companies to explore options for providing GPU machines for public CI infrastructure and email John and Megan + if able to help. +* Codeplay team to publish documentation for CI infrastructure handover. +* John to update the working group README with current project milestones. +* Project leads to update their project milestone pages for John's reference. +* John to reach out to member companies individually about transferring CI infrastructure responsibilities. +* Project teams to consider promoting the upcoming virtual dev summit on September 17th to their networks. + +Summary +========= + +UXL Infrastructure Transfer Discussion: (`slides`_) +======================================================= + +The meeting discussed the transfer of UXL Foundations' engineering infrastructure responsibilities, as Aaron is no +longer able to maintain it. John and Rod shared that they are reaching out to member companies to gauge their interest +and capacity to take on this responsibility. Rod presented slides to outline the current state of the CI infrastructure +and planned to discuss further details with the team. + +CI Infrastructure Transition Challenges: +========================================== + +Rod discussed the current state of CI (Continuous Integration) for the foundation's repositories. He explained that +while some basic CI exists, primarily in Intel's infrastructure, the goal is to have public CI that can validate +projects independently. Rod mentioned that projects have listed their CI requirements on a GitHub page and that a +tracking board exists for open CI-related items. He also noted that Aaron has been the administrator for the GitHub +organization and has been working with Codeplay to document CI setup and establish infrastructure. However, Rod revealed +that Codeplay can no longer continue these activities, as Aaron is no longer able to act as the admin, and Robert has +stepped back from his roles in the steering committee and as a spec editor. + +Hardware and CI Resource Changes: +=================================== + +Rod discussed the changes in available hardware and CI resources, noting that Intel's Tiber cloud and GPU Max machines +are no longer accessible. He emphasized the need to find new ways to host hardware for various projects, secure +workflows, and maintain a knowledge base. Rod highlighted the importance of GPU testing capabilities, which are +currently missing, and called for contributions to add runners and hardware. The team is seeking organizations or +individuals to help with these activities moving forward. + +Public CI Infrastructure Transition Plan: +=========================================== + +Rod discussed the transition of public CI infrastructure and the need for GitHub organization administrators. He +emphasized the importance of finding a new owner for establishing public CI and sourcing GPU machines for testing. Rod +also explained the roles and responsibilities of GitHub repository administrators, including managing user permissions +and security incident reports. He called for volunteers to help with these tasks and encouraged members to apply for +additional CI resources through the Linux Foundation or other providers. + +Infrastructure Changes and Workflow Impact: +============================================= + +The team discussed infrastructure changes and their impact on workflows. Rod confirmed that most removed experimental +projects were not in active use, and the only ongoing project using their infrastructure is the oneDNN project, which +runs tests on separate machines and posts results publicly. Hamza explained that while some projects use ARM runners, +Github now offers public ARM runners on their cobalt platform, though these are not guaranteed to have specific +architectures and have had recent issues with Microsoft's architecture changes. + +Centralized Infrastructure Planning Discussion: +================================================= + +The group discussed the need for a centralized infrastructure to support their projects, with John emphasizing that it +should be customer-driven and coordinated by a central body. Hamza and Rod clarified that the long-term plan involves +shared resources that projects can access, though the exact implementation details are still being worked out. John +requested that other member companies volunteer to help host projects and that attendees take the initiative to +coordinate infrastructure within their organizations. + +Project Updates and Backend Progress: +======================================= + +The team reviewed updates across various projects. Nikolay mentioned no specific updates for his project, while John +planned to update the working group's README and milestone information. Andrey reported that the ARM CPU backend was +enabled for the SFT domain and an RFC was opened to support the OpenBLAS backend. Mike shared that they were working +towards their next release with a code freeze approaching, which would include an improved tasking API. Timmie also +reported progress, mentioning their upcoming milestone with additional range-based APIs and improved algorithm +performance. + +Virtual Dev Summit Planning Discussion: +========================================= + +The team discussed an upcoming virtual dev summit on September 17th, featuring a keynote from Fujitsu and other +presenters. Alison encouraged everyone to register and share the event with their communities, noting that UXL has a +newsletter and social media presence for outreach. John inquired about community communication methods, and Alison +mentioned the UXL newsletter and web/social media channels. The team also briefly discussed plans for a face-to-face +event in Bangalore in Q4, with Megan working on the details. + + + +.. _`slides`: ../presentations/2025-08-26-UXL-Working-Group-CI-Transition.pdf diff --git a/meetings/notes/2026-02-13.rst b/meetings/notes/2026-02-13.rst index c6d26f2..80a34fe 100644 --- a/meetings/notes/2026-02-13.rst +++ b/meetings/notes/2026-02-13.rst @@ -1,88 +1,96 @@ -========================== -Open Source WG: 02/13/2026 -========================== - -Recording: A recording of the meeting is available in the Linux Foundation https://openprofile.dev/ profile. If you are -a member of the Working Group you can access this through your account. - -Attendees -========= - -* Aniket Garade - Centre for Development of Advanced Computing - -* Ragesh Hajela - Fujitsu - -* Melissa Aranzamendez - The Linux Foundation - -* Maria Kraynyuk - Intel -* John Melonakos - Intel -* Michael Voss - Intel -* Sri Raj Paul - Intel -* Alexey Kukanov - Intel -* Timmie Smith - Intel -* Nikolay Petrov - Intel - -* Biagio COSENZA - University of Salerno - - -Quick Recap -=========== - -The meeting focused on transitioning the oneAPI specification to a dynamic specification model, with John presenting the -proposal and addressing concerns raised by Alexey about the loss of milestone markers and versioning clarity. The group -discussed how to handle the specification updates for individual components, with Mike raising practical questions about -hosting and versioning the documentation. Project updates were shared by Maria (oneMath), Timmie (oneDPL), Mike -(oneTBB), and Sri (oneCCL), highlighting various technical improvements and ongoing development work. The conversation -ended with a discussion about creating marketing content and awareness for the UXL projects, with John inviting members -to contribute source material for creating explainer videos. - -Next Steps -========== - -* John and Mike: Work through the process of moving oneTBB and oneDPL specifications to a new hosting location (separate - from the main UXL site), update links on the new UXL website, and determine version numbering, before the next oneAPI - release. -* Maria/oneMath team: Discuss and decide on the handling of oneMath specification/documentation in light of the move to - dynamic spec, including whether to move it to GitHub or retain a separate spec, at next week's Math SIG meeting. -* John: Send email to all projects requesting they provide source materials (e.g., existing videos, documentation) to - help generate explainer videos for each project for the new UXL website. -* Nikolay: Provide updates in upcoming months regarding progress on renaming and recognition of the scikit-learn - plugin/extension for Wanda, including ongoing discussions with Inria and Probable. - -Summary -======= - -Dynamic API Specification Proposal: -=================================== - -The meeting focused on discussing a proposal to move the oneAPI specification to a dynamic specification, with John -presenting the options to the group. The steering committee had already expressed support for whatever decision the -working group would make. John explained that the current option of maintaining a separate specification release was not -feasible due to resource constraints and outdated components. The group discussed the three main options: continuing -with the current system, releasing an incomplete specification, or moving to a dynamic specification with pointers to -each project's documentation. Alexey was invited to share his concerns, which were noted but not detailed in the -transcript. - -Dynamic Specification Transition Discussion: -============================================ - -The team discussed the transition from a specification-based to a dynamic specification approach for their -components. John explained that while the steering committee preferred the term "dynamic specification" for continuity, -it was essentially moving towards product documentation rather than a true specification. Alexey raised concerns about -the loss of milestone markers and versioning clarity for users when moving away from fixed specification releases. The -team agreed to host specifications separately from GitHub, allowing components like TBB and DPL to maintain their own -version numbers independently of other projects. Maria provided updates on oneMath, including ARM backend support, -library updates, and security improvements, noting that the specification changes would need to be reflected in the -upcoming 2026 release. - -Team Progress and Collaboration Updates: -======================================== - -The meeting covered updates from different teams on their progress and plans for the year. Nikolay discussed the cleanup -efforts and alignment of oneDAL specifications with the C++ standard. Timmie highlighted ongoing work on parallel range -algorithms and random number generators. Mike talked about the team's approach to RFCs and collaborations, including -work with Fermilab and improvements to ordered containers. Sri provided updates on CCL, including API changes to align -with industry standards and support for various collective operations. John emphasized the need for marketing efforts to -build awareness and adoption of UXL tools across member companies. The group discussed creating content like explainer -videos to promote tool usage. Ragesh inquired about updates on the scikit-learn plugin for Wanda, which Nikolay -explained is still in early stages of collaboration with external maintainers. +========================== +Open Source WG: 02/13/2026 +========================== + + +.. note:: + + Current guidance: the `dynamic oneAPI specification `__ + links to the concepts and project documentation maintained today. These minutes + record the discussion at the meeting date; release plans and API descriptions + below are historical. Obsolete destinations have been updated or removed. + +Recording: A recording of the meeting is available in the Linux Foundation https://openprofile.dev/ profile. If you are +a member of the Working Group you can access this through your account. + +Attendees +========= + +* Aniket Garade - Centre for Development of Advanced Computing + +* Ragesh Hajela - Fujitsu + +* Melissa Aranzamendez - The Linux Foundation + +* Maria Kraynyuk - Intel +* John Melonakos - Intel +* Michael Voss - Intel +* Sri Raj Paul - Intel +* Alexey Kukanov - Intel +* Timmie Smith - Intel +* Nikolay Petrov - Intel + +* Biagio COSENZA - University of Salerno + + +Quick Recap +=========== + +The meeting focused on transitioning the oneAPI specification to a dynamic specification model, with John presenting the +proposal and addressing concerns raised by Alexey about the loss of milestone markers and versioning clarity. The group +discussed how to handle the specification updates for individual components, with Mike raising practical questions about +hosting and versioning the documentation. Project updates were shared by Maria (oneMath), Timmie (oneDPL), Mike +(oneTBB), and Sri (oneCCL), highlighting various technical improvements and ongoing development work. The conversation +ended with a discussion about creating marketing content and awareness for the UXL projects, with John inviting members +to contribute source material for creating explainer videos. + +Next Steps +========== + +* John and Mike: Work through the process of moving oneTBB and oneDPL specifications to a new hosting location (separate + from the main UXL site), update links on the new UXL website, and determine version numbering, before the next oneAPI + release. +* Maria/oneMath team: Discuss and decide on the handling of oneMath specification/documentation in light of the move to + dynamic spec, including whether to move it to GitHub or retain a separate spec, at next week's Math SIG meeting. +* John: Send email to all projects requesting they provide source materials (e.g., existing videos, documentation) to + help generate explainer videos for each project for the new UXL website. +* Nikolay: Provide updates in upcoming months regarding progress on renaming and recognition of the scikit-learn + plugin/extension for Wanda, including ongoing discussions with Inria and Probable. + +Summary +======== + +Dynamic API Specification Proposal: +=================================== + +The meeting focused on discussing a proposal to move the oneAPI specification to a dynamic specification, with John +presenting the options to the group. The steering committee had already expressed support for whatever decision the +working group would make. John explained that the current option of maintaining a separate specification release was not +feasible due to resource constraints and outdated components. The group discussed the three main options: continuing +with the current system, releasing an incomplete specification, or moving to a dynamic specification with pointers to +each project's documentation. Alexey was invited to share his concerns, which were noted but not detailed in the +transcript. + +Dynamic Specification Transition Discussion: +============================================ + +The team discussed the transition from a specification-based to a dynamic specification approach for their +components. John explained that while the steering committee preferred the term "dynamic specification" for continuity, +it was essentially moving towards product documentation rather than a true specification. Alexey raised concerns about +the loss of milestone markers and versioning clarity for users when moving away from fixed specification releases. The +team agreed to host specifications separately from GitHub, allowing components like TBB and DPL to maintain their own +version numbers independently of other projects. Maria provided updates on oneMath, including ARM backend support, +library updates, and security improvements, noting that the specification changes would need to be reflected in the +upcoming 2026 release. + +Team Progress and Collaboration Updates: +======================================== + +The meeting covered updates from different teams on their progress and plans for the year. Nikolay discussed the cleanup +efforts and alignment of oneDAL specifications with the C++ standard. Timmie highlighted ongoing work on parallel range +algorithms and random number generators. Mike talked about the team's approach to RFCs and collaborations, including +work with Fermilab and improvements to ordered containers. Sri provided updates on CCL, including API changes to align +with industry standards and support for various collective operations. John emphasized the need for marketing efforts to +build awareness and adoption of UXL tools across member companies. The group discussed creating content like explainer +videos to promote tool usage. Ragesh inquired about updates on the scikit-learn plugin for Wanda, which Nikolay +explained is still in early stages of collaboration with external maintainers. diff --git a/meetings/notes/2026-05-18.rst b/meetings/notes/2026-05-18.rst index d6a98bf..2c7ed88 100644 --- a/meetings/notes/2026-05-18.rst +++ b/meetings/notes/2026-05-18.rst @@ -1,119 +1,119 @@ -========================== -Open Source WG: 05/18/2026 -========================== - -Recording: A recording of the meeting is available in the Linux Foundation https://openprofile.dev/ profile. If you are -a member of the Working Group you can access this through your account. - -Attendees -========= - -* Megan Knight - Arm - -* Deepika H V - C-DAC -* Laxmikant Botkewar - C-DAC - -* Ragesh Hajela - Fujitsu - -* Alexey Kukanov - Intel -* John Melonakos - Intel -* Maria Kraynyuk - Intel -* Michael Voss - Intel -* Nikolay Petrov - Intel - -* Melissa Aranzamendez - The Linux Foundation - -* Biagio Cosenza - University of Salerno - -Quick Recap -=========== - -The meeting focused on updates and discussions across multiple oneAPI library projects, including oneTBB, oneMath, -oneDPL, and oneDAL. John and Mike discussed the transition of oneTBB's specification into its documentation, with plans -to eventually integrate it fully into the developer reference. Biagio presented the Linux Foundation education -initiative, proposing to start with four mini-courses for the projects and seeking subject matter experts for each -course. The team reviewed current development activities, with Mike reporting on oneTBB's next release including C++ -modules support and NUMA extensions, while Alexey mentioned oneDPL's focus on closing implementation gaps for parallel -differential algorithms and deprecating FPGA support. Maria provided updates on oneMath's plans to update the oneMKL -backend and discussed the potential removal of SYCL buffer interface, which received mixed feedback from the -team. Biagio concluded by sharing discussions from the SYCL Working Group regarding the deprecation of buffer interface -and specialization constants, noting that buffer performance is generally lower than USM and that the buffer interface -has many corner cases that need handling. - -Next Steps -========== - -* John: Update the oneMath website links to point to the new documentation/specification structure, similar to what was - done for oneTBB. -* John: Send out a follow-up email after the meeting to collect source materials (slide decks, data sheets, marketing - materials) for creating explainer videos for each library. -* All Project Leads: Respond to John's email with the most fresh and relevant materials for their respective libraries. -* All Project Leads: Assign a Subject Matter Expert (SME) for each of the 4 mini-courses to be developed with the Linux - Foundation Education team. -* Biagio: Share the Linux Foundation Education slides with the meeting attendees. -* Biagio: Create and distribute a form to gather feedback from projects on the proposed SYCL changes (buffer interface, - specialization constants, etc.). -* John: Work with Melissa to schedule the next quarterly - -oneMath Specification Discussion Meeting: -========================================= - -John and Biagio discussed the oneMath specification while waiting for other participants to join the meeting. John -mentioned that he had joined a Math SIG the previous week to discuss this specification, noting that it faced similar -challenges as oneTBB and oneDPL. - -Updated Specification Implementation Plans: -=========================================== - -Mike announced that they published an updated specification on GitHub, eliminating version numbers and embracing a -dynamic specification approach. The team discussed plans to integrate the specification into their documentation over -time, with most API content moving to the reference section while preview features remain in the reference section. John -noted that oneMath needs to implement a similar approach, and they discussed updating website links to point to the new -integrated specification and documentation structure. - -oneMath Documentation and Video Plans: -====================================== - -The team discussed moving oneMath specifications back into their documentation, with John explaining that while other -components like oneDNN and oneDAL had dropped specification maintenance, oneMath still needs its architectural content -which isn't duplicated elsewhere. John clarified that Nick from ARM is now the lead maintainer of oneMath. The meeting -then shifted to plans for creating explainer videos for each library, with John outlining a process where he would -collect current slide decks and marketing materials from projects, create initial video drafts and transcripts, then -return them to projects for review and approval before recording and publishing the final videos on the new website. - -Linux Foundation Educational Platform Planning: (`LF Education Slides`_) -=============================================== - -The team discussed implementing a Linux Foundation educational platform starting with four mini-courses, with Biagio -explaining that the initial phase would involve free content with no budget required from the project. The plan involves -identifying subject matter experts (SMEs) for each course, with Mike Walsh suggested as a potential SME, and the content -would start as free microlearning videos before potentially expanding to paid certifications in the future. The team -agreed to start with mini-courses on 6 projects and decided to provide feedback to Kara about the course strategy at the -next open source meeting. - -Library Projects Development Updates: -===================================== - -The team provided updates on their respective library projects. Mike reported that oneTBB is working on its next release -with code freeze approaching, including support for C++ modules and NUMA extensions, with plans for four releases per -year featuring major releases in spring and fall. Alexey discussed oneDPL's progress on closing implementation for -parallel differential algorithms accepted for C++26, with plans to propose a cleaner version through the RFC process -within the next year, including deprecating FPGA support. Maria shared that the oneMKL backend team plans to update -oneMKL following a recent public release and is discussing making the SYCL buffer optional, seeking feedback on known -use cases for this feature. - -SYCL Buffer Accessory Discussio: (`SYCL Slides`_) -================================= - -The team discussed potential changes to SYCL, including the removal of buffer accessory in favor of USM, which would -reduce binary size and address performance issues. Biagio presented feedback from the SYCL Working Group regarding -several proposed changes, including buffer accessory deprecation, adaptive CPP support, and specialization -constants. The group expressed mixed opinions about deprecating buffer accessory, with some noting implementation -challenges and performance concerns, while others supported keeping it as an optional feature. - -The conversation ended with a decision to move to quarterly meetings going forward, with special meetings as needed -based on feedback from participants. - - -.. _`SYCL Slides`: ../presentations/2026-05-18-IWOCL_2026__SYCL__An_Update_from_the_Khronos_Working_Group.pdf -.. _`LF Education Slides`: ../presentations/2026-05-18-LF_Education_Development_Process.pdf +============================ +Open Source WG: 05/18/2026 +============================ + +Recording: A recording of the meeting is available in the Linux Foundation https://openprofile.dev/ profile. If you are +a member of the Working Group you can access this through your account. + +Attendees +=========== + +* Megan Knight - Arm + +* Deepika H V - C-DAC +* Laxmikant Botkewar - C-DAC + +* Ragesh Hajela - Fujitsu + +* Alexey Kukanov - Intel +* John Melonakos - Intel +* Maria Kraynyuk - Intel +* Michael Voss - Intel +* Nikolay Petrov - Intel + +* Melissa Aranzamendez - The Linux Foundation + +* Biagio Cosenza - University of Salerno + +Quick Recap +============= + +The meeting focused on updates and discussions across multiple oneAPI library projects, including oneTBB, oneMath, +oneDPL, and oneDAL. John and Mike discussed the transition of oneTBB's specification into its documentation, with plans +to eventually integrate it fully into the developer reference. Biagio presented the Linux Foundation education +initiative, proposing to start with four mini-courses for the projects and seeking subject matter experts for each +course. The team reviewed current development activities, with Mike reporting on oneTBB's next release including C++ +modules support and NUMA extensions, while Alexey mentioned oneDPL's focus on closing implementation gaps for parallel +differential algorithms and deprecating FPGA support. Maria provided updates on oneMath's plans to update the oneMKL +backend and discussed the potential removal of SYCL buffer interface, which received mixed feedback from the +team. Biagio concluded by sharing discussions from the SYCL Working Group regarding the deprecation of buffer interface +and specialization constants, noting that buffer performance is generally lower than USM and that the buffer interface +has many corner cases that need handling. + +Next Steps +============ + +* John: Update the oneMath website links to point to the new documentation/specification structure, similar to what was + done for oneTBB. +* John: Send out a follow-up email after the meeting to collect source materials (slide decks, data sheets, marketing + materials) for creating explainer videos for each library. +* All Project Leads: Respond to John's email with the most fresh and relevant materials for their respective libraries. +* All Project Leads: Assign a Subject Matter Expert (SME) for each of the 4 mini-courses to be developed with the Linux + Foundation Education team. +* Biagio: Share the Linux Foundation Education slides with the meeting attendees. +* Biagio: Create and distribute a form to gather feedback from projects on the proposed SYCL changes (buffer interface, + specialization constants, etc.). +* John: Work with Melissa to schedule the next quarterly + +oneMath Specification Discussion Meeting: +=========================================== + +John and Biagio discussed the oneMath specification while waiting for other participants to join the meeting. John +mentioned that he had joined a Math SIG the previous week to discuss this specification, noting that it faced similar +challenges as oneTBB and oneDPL. + +Updated Specification Implementation Plans: +============================================= + +Mike announced that they published an updated specification on GitHub, eliminating version numbers and embracing a +dynamic specification approach. The team discussed plans to integrate the specification into their documentation over +time, with most API content moving to the reference section while preview features remain in the reference section. John +noted that oneMath needs to implement a similar approach, and they discussed updating website links to point to the new +integrated specification and documentation structure. + +oneMath Documentation and Video Plans: +======================================== + +The team discussed moving oneMath specifications back into their documentation, with John explaining that while other +components like oneDNN and oneDAL had dropped specification maintenance, oneMath still needs its architectural content +which isn't duplicated elsewhere. John clarified that Nick from ARM is now the lead maintainer of oneMath. The meeting +then shifted to plans for creating explainer videos for each library, with John outlining a process where he would +collect current slide decks and marketing materials from projects, create initial video drafts and transcripts, then +return them to projects for review and approval before recording and publishing the final videos on the new website. + +Linux Foundation Educational Platform Planning: (`LF Education Slides`_) +=========================================================================== + +The team discussed implementing a Linux Foundation educational platform starting with four mini-courses, with Biagio +explaining that the initial phase would involve free content with no budget required from the project. The plan involves +identifying subject matter experts (SMEs) for each course, with Mike Walsh suggested as a potential SME, and the content +would start as free microlearning videos before potentially expanding to paid certifications in the future. The team +agreed to start with mini-courses on 6 projects and decided to provide feedback to Kara about the course strategy at the +next open source meeting. + +Library Projects Development Updates: +======================================= + +The team provided updates on their respective library projects. Mike reported that oneTBB is working on its next release +with code freeze approaching, including support for C++ modules and NUMA extensions, with plans for four releases per +year featuring major releases in spring and fall. Alexey discussed oneDPL's progress on closing implementation for +parallel differential algorithms accepted for C++26, with plans to propose a cleaner version through the RFC process +within the next year, including deprecating FPGA support. Maria shared that the oneMKL backend team plans to update +oneMKL following a recent public release and is discussing making the SYCL buffer optional, seeking feedback on known +use cases for this feature. + +SYCL Buffer Accessory Discussio: (`SYCL Slides`_) +=================================================== + +The team discussed potential changes to SYCL, including the removal of buffer accessory in favor of USM, which would +reduce binary size and address performance issues. Biagio presented feedback from the SYCL Working Group regarding +several proposed changes, including buffer accessory deprecation, adaptive CPP support, and specialization +constants. The group expressed mixed opinions about deprecating buffer accessory, with some noting implementation +challenges and performance concerns, while others supported keeping it as an optional feature. + +The conversation ended with a decision to move to quarterly meetings going forward, with special meetings as needed +based on feedback from participants. + + +.. _`SYCL Slides`: ../presentations/2026-05-18-IWOCL_2026__SYCL__An_Update_from_the_Khronos_Working_Group.pdf +.. _`LF Education Slides`: ../presentations/2026-05-18-LF_Education_Development_Process.pdf diff --git a/meetings/notes/README.rst b/meetings/notes/README.rst index c76a25a..2216a99 100644 --- a/meetings/notes/README.rst +++ b/meetings/notes/README.rst @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ Working Group meeting records -============================= +=============================== Browse discussions, action items and presentation materials by date. Minutes record the discussion at the time; consult current project documentation for @@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ Recordings are available to Working Group members through their already published in this repository. 2026 ----- +-------- .. list-table:: :header-rows: 1 @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ already published in this repository. - — 2025 ----- +-------- .. list-table:: :header-rows: 1 @@ -56,10 +56,10 @@ already published in this repository. - Infrastructure handover; hardware and administrator support; developer summit planning - `CI transition <../presentations/2025-08-26-UXL-Working-Group-CI-Transition.pdf>`__ * - `2025-07-22 <2025-07-22.rst>`__ - - Contribution policies and compliance; updates from the six library projects + - Contribution policies and compliance; project updates (June/July record duplication under review) - — * - `2025-06-22 <2025-06-22.rst>`__ - - Contribution policies and compliance; updates from the six library projects + - Contribution policies and compliance; project updates (June/July record duplication under review) - — * - `2025-05-27 <2025-05-27.rst>`__ - Security progress; hardware runners; CPU-inclusive APIs; library proposals @@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ already published in this repository. - `CI <../presentations/2025-01-28-UXLCIPoC.pdf>`__ 2024 archive ------------- +-------------- * `2024-11-26 <2024-11-26.rst>`__ * `2024-10-22 <2024-10-22.rst>`__ diff --git a/project-infrastructure/project-ci-documentation.md b/project-infrastructure/project-ci-documentation.md index 134dd8c..d5f1d64 100644 --- a/project-infrastructure/project-ci-documentation.md +++ b/project-infrastructure/project-ci-documentation.md @@ -1,25 +1,40 @@ # Project Infrastructure for CI and CD -UXL Foundation CI Infrastructure -================================ - -Documentation maintenance review: 2026-09-08. This date does not certify runner +Documentation maintenance review: 2026-09-09. This date does not certify runner availability. Project representatives should add a last-verified date and public workflow/log links when updating their section. Entries marked unverified need confirmation; listed software versions and shared capacity are reported values, not current availability guarantees. -The table outlines the existing shared public CI available to UXL Foundation projects. +## Reading and updating this inventory + +This document records reported requirements and previous infrastructure descriptions. +It is not a live inventory of provisioned runners. Shared capacity and per-project +availability below remain unverified until an owner supplies current evidence. + +When updating a project section, include: + +- Verification date and agreed support owner. +- A public workflow and recent run showing the tested platform. +- Whether capacity is shared or dedicated, and how contributors request access. +- Remaining requirements separately from resources already available. -| Owner | Type | OS | Number | Active? | Notes | +The [August 2025 infrastructure discussion](../meetings/notes/2025-08-26.rst) +records changes to hardware access and support. Earlier runner catalogues should +not be used as current availability guarantees. + +## Previously reported shared capacity + +| Owner | Type | OS | Number | Verified availability | Notes | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | -| GitHub | CPU x86 | Linux, Windows, Mac | Up to 500 concurrent | Yes | | -| GitHub | CPU AArch64 | Linux, Mac | Up to 500 concurrent | Yes | | +| GitHub | CPU x86 | Linux, Windows, Mac | Up to 500 concurrent | Unverified | | +| GitHub | CPU AArch64 | Linux, Mac | Up to 500 concurrent | Unverified | | -The following sections gather together, for each UXL Foundation project, the existing public CI set up and the minimum CI requirements so that contributions can be received with confidence that sufficient testing has been done. -Currently much of the project CI is hosted by internal corporate infrastructure, and is separated from the open source repositories. +The project sections below preserve previously reported CI setups and requested +coverage. Descriptions of corporate infrastructure and software versions need +project-owner verification before they are used for planning. -This initiative is being kicked off to bring as much public CI as is possible for the UXL Foundation projects. +The initiative tracks requirements for making project validation accessible to external contributors. oneDNN ------ @@ -33,12 +48,12 @@ Support contacts for CI: | AArch64 | Hamza Butt @theComputeKid | | x64, new platforms | Vadim Pirogov @vpirogov | -*Existing public CI* +*Previously reported public CI — current availability unverified* -| Target | OS | Concurrency | Active? | How to access logs | +| Target | OS | Concurrency | Verified availability | How to access logs | | ----------- | --------------------- | ------------ | ------- | ------------------- | -| CPU x64 | Linux, Windows, macOS | 2 | Yes | CI x64 PR check | -| CPU AArch64 | Linux, macOS | 2 | Yes | CI AArch64 PR check | +| CPU x64 | Linux, Windows, macOS | 2 | Unverified | CI x64 PR check | +| CPU AArch64 | Linux, macOS | 2 | Unverified | CI AArch64 PR check | *Required Public CI Infrastructure Needed To Confidently Accept Contributions* @@ -78,7 +93,7 @@ oneDPL Representative: Timmie Smith -Support contact for CI: +Support contact for CI: not yet documented; project representative to confirm. | Maintainers | | ------------------------- | @@ -86,7 +101,7 @@ Support contact for CI: | Dmitriy Sobolev @dmitriy-sobolev | | Timmie Smith @timmiesmith | -*Existing public CI* +*Previously reported public CI — current availability unverified* The current CI infrastructure is setup for per-commit testing. It is run automatically on PRs in the oneDPL repository when a new commit is made to the source branch of the PR. @@ -110,8 +125,9 @@ when a new commit is made to the source branch of the PR. There are no special paths for particular architectures for AMD and NVIDIA GPUs in oneDPL at this point. It is sufficient for correctness to run functional testing on one GPU from a vendor. More information on the supported platforms can be found in the links below. -* NVIDIA: https://developer.codeplay.com/products/oneapi/nvidia/latest/guides/get-started-guide-nvidia#supported-platforms -* AMD: https://developer.codeplay.com/products/oneapi/amd/latest/guides/get-started-guide-amd#supported-platforms +Use [oneDPL's current documentation](https://uxlfoundation.github.io/oneDPL/) +for supported backends and their requirements. The former Codeplay `latest` guide +links failed the September 2026 live-link review and are no longer used here. oneDPL testing must cover all C++ standard execution policies as well as oneDPL device policies. @@ -152,47 +168,47 @@ Support contacts for CI: More details available in [MAINTAINERS.md](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/MAINTAINERS.md) -### *Existing public CI* +### *Previously reported public CI — current availability unverified* oneDAL -| Platform | Type | OS | Number | Active? | Comments | +| Platform | Type | OS | Number | Verified availability | Comments | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | -| Github | CPU AArch64 | Linux | 2 | Yes | 2 Pipelines on Physical Arm systems Github hosted and Arm-Hosted. [ci-aarch64.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.github/workflows/ci-aarch64.yml) | +| Github | CPU AArch64 | Linux | 2 | Unverified | 2 Pipelines on Physical Arm systems Github hosted and Arm-Hosted. [ci-aarch64.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.github/workflows/ci-aarch64.yml) | | Github | Intel GPU (ICX compiler) | Linux | 1 | Disabled (as documented) | Pipeline configured for GPU validation on uxlfoundation GPU runners, currently disabled due to issues with Tiber Cloud. [ci.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.github/workflows/ci.yml) | -| Github | ABI conformance | Linux | 1 | Yes | ABI compatibility runs that compare PR to the main. [ci.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.github/workflows/ci.yml) | -| Github | Docker validation | Linux | 1 | Yes | Validation of oneDAL development env docker file. [docker-validation-ci.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.github/workflows/docker-validation-ci.yml) | -| Github | CPU Nightly | Linux, Windows | 2 | Yes | Nightly builds and broader validation for oneDAL. [nightly-build.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.github/workflows/nightly-build.yml) | -| Github | Copyright headers check | Linux | 1 | Yes | Check for proper copyright headers. [skywalking-eyes.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.github/workflows/skywalking-eyes.yml) | -| Github | PR checklist validation | Linux | 1 | Yes | Validation of PR conformance. [pr-checklist.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.github/workflows/pr-checklist.yml) | -| Github | Documentation deployment to gh-pages | Linux | 1 | Yes | Automatic docs deployment with release tag creation. [docs-release.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.github/workflows/docs-release.yml) | -| Mergify | Helper automation for merges/backporting | Linux | 1 | Yes | Automated labels assignment, removal of renovate branches. [.mergify.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.github/.mergify.yml) | -| Renovate | Automated dependency updates | Linux | 1 | Yes | Dependabot alternative, manages dependency updates for components. [renovate.json](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.github/renovate.json) | -| Azure DevOps | Clang format check| Linux | 1 | Yes | Enforce coding standards. [ci.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.ci/pipeline/ci.yml) | -| Azure DevOps | CI build/test for x86/ARM/RISC-V with OS compilers | Linux, Windows | 8 | Yes | Intel build natively, ARM and RISC-V with cross-platform build and QEMU emulation. Build with GCC/VC compilers. [ci.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.ci/pipeline/ci.yml) | -| Azure DevOps | CI build/test with Bazel | Linux | 1 | Yes | Bazel-based build and validation. [ci.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.ci/pipeline/ci.yml) | -| Azure DevOps | oneDAL documentation build | Linux | 1 | Yes | Build documentation for validation purposes in CI. [docs.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.ci/pipeline/docs.yml) | -| Azure DevOps | sklearnex validation | Linux | 1 | Yes | Checking out sklearnex sources, doing build and validation with oneDAL PR changes. [ci.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.ci/pipeline/ci.yml) | -| Codefactor | Codefactor checks | N/A | 1 | Yes | Enforcing code checks in PRs, Bandit, and other code quality checks. [Codefactor](https://www.codefactor.io/repository/github/uxlfoundation/onedal) | +| Github | ABI conformance | Linux | 1 | Unverified | ABI compatibility runs that compare PR to the main. [ci.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.github/workflows/ci.yml) | +| Github | Docker validation | Linux | 1 | Unverified | Validation of oneDAL development env docker file. [docker-validation-ci.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.github/workflows/docker-validation-ci.yml) | +| Github | CPU Nightly | Linux, Windows | 2 | Unverified | Nightly builds and broader validation for oneDAL. [nightly-build.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.github/workflows/nightly-build.yml) | +| Github | Copyright headers check | Linux | 1 | Unverified | Check for proper copyright headers. [skywalking-eyes.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.github/workflows/skywalking-eyes.yml) | +| Github | PR checklist validation | Linux | 1 | Unverified | Validation of PR conformance. [pr-checklist.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.github/workflows/pr-checklist.yml) | +| Github | Documentation deployment to gh-pages | Linux | 1 | Unverified | Automatic docs deployment with release tag creation. [docs-release.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.github/workflows/docs-release.yml) | +| Mergify | Helper automation for merges/backporting | Linux | 1 | Unverified | Automated labels assignment, removal of renovate branches. [.mergify.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.github/.mergify.yml) | +| Renovate | Automated dependency updates | Linux | 1 | Unverified | Dependabot alternative, manages dependency updates for components. [renovate.json](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.github/renovate.json) | +| Azure DevOps | Clang format check| Linux | 1 | Unverified | Enforce coding standards. [ci.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.ci/pipeline/ci.yml) | +| Azure DevOps | CI build/test for x86/ARM/RISC-V with OS compilers | Linux, Windows | 8 | Unverified | Intel build natively, ARM and RISC-V with cross-platform build and QEMU emulation. Build with GCC/VC compilers. [ci.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.ci/pipeline/ci.yml) | +| Azure DevOps | CI build/test with Bazel | Linux | 1 | Unverified | Bazel-based build and validation. [ci.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.ci/pipeline/ci.yml) | +| Azure DevOps | oneDAL documentation build | Linux | 1 | Unverified | Build documentation for validation purposes in CI. [docs.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.ci/pipeline/docs.yml) | +| Azure DevOps | sklearnex validation | Linux | 1 | Unverified | Checking out sklearnex sources, doing build and validation with oneDAL PR changes. [ci.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneDAL/blob/main/.ci/pipeline/ci.yml) | +| Codefactor | Codefactor checks | N/A | 1 | Unverified | Enforcing code checks in PRs, Bandit, and other code quality checks. [Codefactor](https://www.codefactor.io/repository/github/uxlfoundation/onedal) | scikit-learn-intelex -| Platform | Type | OS | Number | Active? | Comments | +| Platform | Type | OS | Number | Verified availability | Comments | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | -| Mergify | Helper automation for merges/backporting | Linux | 1 | Yes | Automated labels assignment, removal of renovate branches. [.mergify.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex/blob/main/.github/.mergify.yml) | -| Renovate | Automated dependency updates | Linux | 1 | Yes | Dependabot alternative, manages dependency updates for components. [renovate.json](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex/blob/main/.github/renovate.json) | -| Azure DevOps | CI conda based | Linux, Windows | 10 | Yes | CI build and testing for different scikit/python combinations [ci.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex/blob/main/.ci/pipeline/ci.yml) | -| Azure DevOps | Documentation validation | Linux | 10| Yes | Documentation build validation [docs.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex/blob/main/.ci/pipeline/docs.yml) | -| Azure DevOps | Linting | Linux | 1 | Yes | Linting enforcement through pre-commit [linting.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex/blob/main/.ci/pipeline/linting.yml) | -| Azure DevOps | Nightly | Linux | 1 | Yes | Nightly validation against scikit-learn main branch [nightly.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex/blob/main/.ci/pipeline/nightly.yml) | -| Azure DevOps | Coverity | Linux | 1 | Yes | [Coverity](https://scan.coverity.com/projects/daal4py) scans [nightly.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex/blob/main/.ci/pipeline/nightly.yml) | -| Azure DevOps | Releases validation | Linux, Windows | 12 | Yes | Validation of already released versions in pypi and conda-forge [ci.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex/blob/main/.ci/pipeline/release.yml) | -| Github | CI venv based | Linux, Windows | 6 | Yes | CI build and testing for different scikit/python combinations. [ci.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex/blob/main/.github/workflows/ci.yml) | -| Github | Copyright headers check | Linux | 1 | Yes | Check for proper copyright headers. [skywalking-eyes.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex/blob/main/.github/workflows/skywalking-eyes.yml) | -| Github | PR checklist validation | Linux | 1 | Yes | Validation of PR conformance. [pr-checklist.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex/blob/main/.github/workflows/pr-checklist.yml) | -| Github | Documentation deployment to gh-pages | Linux | 1 | Yes | Automatic docs deployment with release tag creation. [docs-release.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex/blob/main/.github/workflows/docs-release.yml) | -| Codefactor | Codefactor checks | N/A | 1 | Yes | Enforcing code checks in PRs, Bandit, and other code quality checks. [Codefactor](https://www.codefactor.io/repository/github/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex) | -| Codecov | Codecoverage | N/A | 1 | Yes | Enforcing coverage tracking and increments in PRs. [Codecov](https://app.codecov.io/gh/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex) | +| Mergify | Helper automation for merges/backporting | Linux | 1 | Unverified | Automated labels assignment, removal of renovate branches. [.mergify.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex/blob/main/.github/.mergify.yml) | +| Renovate | Automated dependency updates | Linux | 1 | Unverified | Dependabot alternative, manages dependency updates for components. [renovate.json](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex/blob/main/.github/renovate.json) | +| Azure DevOps | CI conda based | Linux, Windows | 10 | Unverified | CI build and testing for different scikit/python combinations [ci.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex/blob/main/.ci/pipeline/ci.yml) | +| Azure DevOps | Documentation validation | Linux | 10| Unverified | Documentation build validation [docs.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex/blob/main/.ci/pipeline/docs.yml) | +| Azure DevOps | Linting | Linux | 1 | Unverified | Linting enforcement through pre-commit [linting.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex/blob/main/.ci/pipeline/linting.yml) | +| Azure DevOps | Nightly | Linux | 1 | Unverified | Nightly validation against scikit-learn main branch [nightly.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex/blob/main/.ci/pipeline/nightly.yml) | +| Azure DevOps | Coverity | Linux | 1 | Unverified | [Coverity](https://scan.coverity.com/projects/daal4py) scans [nightly.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex/blob/main/.ci/pipeline/nightly.yml) | +| Azure DevOps | Releases validation | Linux, Windows | 12 | Unverified | Validation of already released versions in pypi and conda-forge [ci.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex/blob/main/.ci/pipeline/release.yml) | +| Github | CI venv based | Linux, Windows | 6 | Unverified | CI build and testing for different scikit/python combinations. [ci.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex/blob/main/.github/workflows/ci.yml) | +| Github | Copyright headers check | Linux | 1 | Unverified | Check for proper copyright headers. [skywalking-eyes.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex/blob/main/.github/workflows/skywalking-eyes.yml) | +| Github | PR checklist validation | Linux | 1 | Unverified | Validation of PR conformance. [pr-checklist.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex/blob/main/.github/workflows/pr-checklist.yml) | +| Github | Documentation deployment to gh-pages | Linux | 1 | Unverified | Automatic docs deployment with release tag creation. [docs-release.yml](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex/blob/main/.github/workflows/docs-release.yml) | +| Codefactor | Codefactor checks | N/A | 1 | Unverified | Enforcing code checks in PRs, Bandit, and other code quality checks. [Codefactor](https://www.codefactor.io/repository/github/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex) | +| Codecov | Codecoverage | N/A | 1 | Unverified | Enforcing coverage tracking and increments in PRs. [Codecov](https://app.codecov.io/gh/uxlfoundation/scikit-learn-intelex) | ### *Required Public CI Infrastructure Needed To Confidently Accept Contributions* @@ -227,11 +243,11 @@ oneCCL Representative: Maria Petrova -Support contact for CI: +Support contact for CI: not yet documented; project representative to confirm. -*Existing public CI* +*Previously reported public CI — current availability unverified* -| Owner | Type | OS | Number | Active? | How to access logs | +| Owner | Type | OS | Number | Verified availability | How to access logs | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Not documented | Not documented | Not documented | Not documented | Unverified | Project representative to provide workflow/log links | @@ -242,10 +258,7 @@ Support contact for CI: | x86 | Intel | CPU | Ubuntu | | AArch64 | Arm | CPU | Ubuntu | -Software Versions: -* CMake -* glibc -* ... +Software requirements: not yet documented; project representative to provide a current requirements link. oneMath ------- @@ -254,11 +267,11 @@ Representative: [Maria Kraynyuk](https://github.com/mkrainiuk) Support contact for CI: [Alexey Srednitsky](https://github.com/toxicscum) -*Existing public CI* +*Previously reported public CI — current availability unverified* -| Owner | Type | OS | Number | Active? | How to access logs | +| Owner | Type | OS | Number | Verified availability | How to access logs | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | -| GitHub | CPU x86 | Ubuntu latest | N/A - GitHub-hosted runners | Yes | From workflow run | +| GitHub | CPU x86 | Ubuntu latest | N/A - GitHub-hosted runners | Unverified | From workflow run | *Required Public CI Infrastructure Needed To Confidently Accept Contributions* @@ -281,21 +294,21 @@ Representative: Michael Voss Support contact for CI: Konstantin Boyarinov -*Existing public CI* +*Previously reported public CI — current availability unverified* -| Runner | Target | OS | Active | How to access logs | +| Runner | Target | OS | Verified availability | How to access logs | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | -| ubuntu-latest | CPU x64 | Linux |Yes | CI PR check | -| ubuntu-24.04 | CPU x64 | Linux | Yes | CI PR check | -| ubuntu-24.04-arm | CPU AArch64 | Linux | Yes | CI PR check | -| ubuntu-22.04 | CPU x64 | Linux | Yes | CI PR check | -| ubuntu-22.04-arm | CPU AArch64 | Linux | Yes | CI PR check | -| macos-15 | CPU AArch64 | macOS | Yes | CI PR check | -| macos-14 | CPU AArch64 | macOS | Yes | CI PR check | -| macos-13 | CPU x64 | macOS | Yes | CI PR check | -| Windows-2025 | CPU x64 | Windows | Yes | CI PR check | -| Windows-2022 | CPU x64 | Windows | Yes | CI PR check | -| Windows-2019 | CPU x64 | Windows | Yes | CI PR check | +| ubuntu-latest | CPU x64 | Linux | Unverified | CI PR check | +| ubuntu-24.04 | CPU x64 | Linux | Unverified | CI PR check | +| ubuntu-24.04-arm | CPU AArch64 | Linux | Unverified | CI PR check | +| ubuntu-22.04 | CPU x64 | Linux | Unverified | CI PR check | +| ubuntu-22.04-arm | CPU AArch64 | Linux | Unverified | CI PR check | +| macos-15 | CPU AArch64 | macOS | Unverified | CI PR check | +| macos-14 | CPU AArch64 | macOS | Unverified | CI PR check | +| macos-13 | CPU x64 | macOS | Unverified | CI PR check | +| Windows-2025 | CPU x64 | Windows | Unverified | CI PR check | +| Windows-2022 | CPU x64 | Windows | Unverified | CI PR check | +| Windows-2019 | CPU x64 | Windows | Unverified | CI PR check | *Required Public CI Infrastructure Needed To Confidently Accept Contributions* @@ -306,16 +319,16 @@ Support contact for CI: Konstantin Boyarinov Software requirements: [link](https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneTBB/blob/master/SYSTEM_REQUIREMENTS.md) -oneCK ------ +oneAPI Construction Kit +---------------------- Representative: Aaron Dron -Support contact for CI: +Support contact for CI: not yet documented; project representative to confirm. -*Existing public CI* +*Previously reported public CI — current availability unverified* -| Owner | Type | OS | Number | Active? | How to access logs | +| Owner | Type | OS | Number | Verified availability | How to access logs | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Not documented | Not documented | Not documented | Not documented | Unverified | Project representative to provide workflow/log links | @@ -326,7 +339,4 @@ Support contact for CI: | x86 | Intel | CPU | Ubuntu | | AArch64 | Arm | CPU | Ubuntu | -Software Versions: -* CMake -* glibc -* ... +Software requirements: not yet documented; project representative to provide a current requirements link. diff --git a/rfc/001-changing-github-org.rst b/rfc/001-changing-github-org.rst index 2acf74f..440f805 100644 --- a/rfc/001-changing-github-org.rst +++ b/rfc/001-changing-github-org.rst @@ -90,11 +90,6 @@ Repo Information - Q4 2024 - onetbb-project_ - oneTBB - * - oneapi-spec - - Robert Cohn - - 5/2/2024 - - uxlfoundation_ - - oneapi-spec_ .. _onednn-project: https://github.com/onednn-project .. _onedal-project: https://github.com/onedal-project @@ -110,7 +105,11 @@ Repo Information .. _onetbb: https://github.com/oneapi-src/onetbb .. _onedpl: https://github.com/oneapi-src/onedpl .. _onemkl: https://github.com/oneapi-src/onemkl -.. _oneapi-spec: https://github.com/uxlfoundation/oneapi-spec +.. note:: + + Specification migration destinations have been removed from this historical + proposal. Use the `dynamic oneAPI specification `__ + and project documentation for current information. Org Administration @@ -125,7 +124,7 @@ for emergency maintenance only. Need to share some guides on how to manage an org. Process -======= +======== This is a sketch of the activity. Each project should prepare its own schedule and plan. Robert Dower, the maintainer of oneapi-src org will help with the diff --git a/rfc/README.rst b/rfc/README.rst index 53a7e21..0e34936 100644 --- a/rfc/README.rst +++ b/rfc/README.rst @@ -20,5 +20,6 @@ Index does not describe today's repository locations. See the current project links in the `Working Group README <../README.rst>`_. -Older specification RFCs remain in the -`archived Specification Working Group `_. +For specification concepts and current project documentation, start with the +`dynamic oneAPI specification `__. Propose current +cross-project changes here; propose API changes in the relevant project.