- Package:
- libamdhip64-dev
- Source:
- libamdhip64-dev
- Description:
- Header files for the AMD implementation of HIP
- Submitter:
- Christian Kastner
- Date:
- 2025-09-29 01:41:01 UTC
- Severity:
- normal
- Tags:
Dear Maintainer, Newer versions of ggml fail to build from source with HIP <= 6.0, with linking failures such as the following: According to upstream the upstream fix introduced in a later version [1], this is because the functions in the bf16 header need to static. Marking as important as it blocks the update of another package. The fix seems simple enough, I will submit a PR. Best, Christian [1]: https://github.com/ROCm/clr/commit/77c581a3ebd47b5e2908973b70adea66891159ee
Hello, Bug #1116585 in rocm-hipamd reported by you has been fixed in the Git repository and is awaiting an upload. You can see the commit message below and you can check the diff of the fix at: https://salsa.debian.org/rocm-team/rocm-hipamd/-/commit/bb952c9a48d4be7cd2a71679528c6618e156f467 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Add Mark-bf16-functions-as-static.patch Closes: #1116585 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (this message was generated automatically) -- Greetings https://bugs.debian.org/1116585
Hello, Bug #1116585 in rocm-hipamd reported by you has been fixed in the Git repository and is awaiting an upload. You can see the commit message below and you can check the diff of the fix at: https://salsa.debian.org/rocm-team/rocm-hipamd/-/commit/bb952c9a48d4be7cd2a71679528c6618e156f467 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Add Mark-bf16-functions-as-static.patch Closes: #1116585 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (this message was generated automatically) -- Greetings https://bugs.debian.org/1116585
Hello, Bug #1116585 in rocm-hipamd reported by you has been fixed in the Git repository and is awaiting an upload. You can see the commit message below and you can check the diff of the fix at: https://salsa.debian.org/rocm-team/rocm-hipamd/-/commit/c980dc9a677a0be98d1acc597b06dca3a69a913c ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Add Mark-bf16-functions-as-static.patch Closes: #1116585 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (this message was generated automatically) -- Greetings https://bugs.debian.org/1116585
Hello, Bug #1116585 in rocm-hipamd reported by you has been fixed in the Git repository and is awaiting an upload. You can see the commit message below and you can check the diff of the fix at: https://salsa.debian.org/rocm-team/rocm-hipamd/-/commit/c980dc9a677a0be98d1acc597b06dca3a69a913c ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Add Mark-bf16-functions-as-static.patch Closes: #1116585 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (this message was generated automatically) -- Greetings https://bugs.debian.org/1116585
Whoa there, Christian. Changing the definition of __HOST_DEVICE__ to implicitly be static inline is using a bazooka to kill a housefly. That would have knock-on effects on any code that uses the __HOST_DEVICE__ macro, not just the handful of functions defined in the bf16 header. That header is indeed quite difficult to use without static or inline qualifiers on all the functions it defines and those functions were clearly always intended to have inline and/or static qualifiers. However, if we want to backport a fix to trixie, changing the macro is not going to be acceptable. User code might be using that __HOST_DEVICE__ macro, in which case the impact may be much larger than just bf16 if we change that definition. For this specific patch, there is also the problem that the __HOST_DEVICE__ macro is defined in multiple different headers, but you've only changed the definition in one. That will result in a warning when both headers are included in the same translation unit (and inconsistent definitions if different translation units include different headers). I would recommend that we consider narrowly adding the appropriate static and/or inline qualifiers to the specific functions in amd_hip_bf16.h where they are needed. Sincerely, Cory Bloor