-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 82
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Backport "Add GPU specific Tags" PR into releases/2.14.0 branch #1943
Backport "Add GPU specific Tags" PR into releases/2.14.0 branch #1943
Conversation
* add nvidia tag for all the tests with Resources-GPU tag * add amd gpu tag in vllm tests * remove wrong comment
Quality Gate passedIssues Measures |
Robot Results
|
@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ Verify Number Of Available GPUs Is Correct | |||
Verify Two Servers Can Be Spawned | |||
[Documentation] Spawns two servers requesting 1 gpu each, and checks | |||
... that both can schedule and are scheduled on different nodes. | |||
[Tags] Sanity Resources-2GPUS | |||
[Tags] Sanity Resources-2GPUS NVIDIA-GPUs |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So, comparing this with all these:
- Backport "Add GPU specific Tags" PR into releases/2.11.0 branch #1939
- Backport "Add GPU specific Tags" PR into releases/2.8.0 branch #1940
- Backport "Add GPU specific Tags" PR into releases/2.13.0 branch #1941
- Backport "Add GPU specific Tags" PR into releases/2.10.0 branch #1942
In all the others we use Resources-2GPU
. I slightly tend to use Resources-2GPUs
or Resource-2GPUS
as we have the s
also in the newly introduced NVIDIA-GPUs
tag. But definitely we should keep these tags consistent, so we can't have this with S
in 2.14 branch and without any s
suffix in the all other branches.
In master
we have this currently: Resources-2GPUS.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
you're right, silly mistakes with replace sorry. I pushed the change in all the branches. Do you mind checking again?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So, I can see that you updated the others making it in sync with this one. Thus approving here. Thanks!
0f82879
into
red-hat-data-services:releases/2.14.0
#1938