[Discussion] 1.7.0 Roadmap

[pengzhao-intel]

copy below content from 1.6 roadmap PR #15589 :), thanks @szha

Let's start a discussion here about the roadmap towards 1.7.0. We are looking for:

New features that are useful to your research and development.
Improvements and patches to existing features.
If you have any item that you'd like to propose to have in the roadmap, please do:

Create (or locate existing) issue/pull request for the item, note the issue/pull request number.
Comment in this issue:

1. the above issue number,
2. one sentence of what the item is about and why it's useful to you.

Indicate whether you'd be willing to help out on the item.
Share the ETA if you're driving the item and have an guesstimate on when it will be done.

Feel free to include items that weren't included in past roadmap discussions that you still wish to include in this release.
cc @apache/mxnet-committers

[pengzhao-intel]

For MKLDNN backend

• MKLDNN as the default CPU binary distribution
  https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/1a22dbd79098adab6d02d16e8d607bae2acc908c0bb1b085d28a51ba@%3Cdev.mxnet.apache.org%3E

• AMP to support bfloat16 training

• [DONE] MKLDNN's branding changed to DNNL from v1.1 Upgrade MKL-DNN dependency to v1.1 #16823
  Reference: https://intel.github.io/mkl-dnn/dev_guide_transition_to_dnnl.html

[atiqsayyed]

For Scala 2.12 release

• Prebuilt scala package for 2.12 #16438
• with growing scala community, the current version for most of the system is 2.13 and existing mxnet release contains only 2.11, It'll be very helpful to have releases with the latest 2.12 and 2.13 versions.

I needed this feature so i locally build 2.12 version, I want to help with this issue but I need some guidance about the current build package and how to go ahead with it.

I'm more than willing to contribute to this specific story

[leezu]

@atiqsayyed this may be feasible for MXNet 1.6 release if you are willing to work on it. You can comment in #16438 and ping yzhliu, nswamy or pllarroy for guidance (listed as codeowner https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/blob/61c8bafdcfee129e4f7a491438a2402e6762ddd9/CODEOWNERS#L16)

[cjolivier01]

XLA or MLIR graph support. Basically generate XLA-compiler-consumable network graph protobuf similar to pytorch’s approach. This actually isn’t a huge undertaking and will add a lot of value to mxnet imho, making it usable for other custom hardware as only an incremental approach from other XLA-compatible platforms such as pytorch and tensorflow.

[pengzhao-intel]

XLA or MLIR graph support. Basically generate XLA-compiler-consumable network graph protobuf similar to pytorch’s approach. This actually isn’t a huge undertaking and will add a lot of value to mxnet imho, making it usable for other custom hardware as only an incremental approach from other XLA-compatible platforms such as pytorch and tensorflow.

Really good suggestion! Our team is working on the XLA/TVM supports for MXNet but it's still in the early stage and I am not sure we can catch up 1.7.

I will update our progress in the community :)

[cjolivier01]

XLA or MLIR graph support. Basically generate XLA-compiler-consumable network graph protobuf similar to pytorch’s approach. This actually isn’t a huge undertaking and will add a lot of value to mxnet imho, making it usable for other custom hardware as only an incremental approach from other XLA-compatible platforms such as pytorch and tensorflow.

Really good suggestion! Our team is working on the XLA/TVM supports for MXNet but it's still in the early stage and I am not sure we can catch up 1.7.

I will update our progress in the community :)

What sort of ETA were you thinking for XLA support? 1.7.1? :D

[pengzhao-intel]

What sort of ETA were you thinking for XLA support? 1.7.1? :D

Most likely, we will start from TVM first and then extend to XLA.

I am not sure about the timeline of 1.7. Maybe some experimental features go to 1.7 and most of the features at 1.8 (or later).

[ptrendx]

XLA is effectively dead at this point so I'm not sure why we would want to invest in that. MLIR is not really ready for prime time. Out of all of the compiler technologies (which I agree are important) TVM seems to be the best and most mature option (additional points for it being Apache project as well and multiple community members already working on integrating it into MXNet).

[cjolivier01]

XLA is effectively dead at this point so I'm not sure why we would want to invest in that. MLIR is not really ready for prime time. Out of all of the compiler technologies (which I agree are important) TVM seems to be the best and most mature option (additional points for it being Apache project as well and multiple community members already working on integrating it into MXNet).

You're certainly entitled to your opinion on XLA/MLIR and TVM, but the fact of the matter is that XLA is more widely supported than TVM (two leading vendors, TF and Pytorch, for instance). If adoption of mxnet is what you're looking for, then adopting technologies that make it easier for hardware vendors to support the maximum number of platforms for the least amount of investment is the best route, imho. So far the approach that mxnet has been taking (opting for proprietary technologies) has arguably been not entirely successful.

[szha]

@cjolivier01 @pengzhao-intel @ptrendx would you mind opening a feature request issue as suggested by the initial post? The roadmap issue is usually for tracking purpose, and having other discussions inside makes it harder to track the features to add.

[cjolivier01]

@cjolivier01 @pengzhao-intel @ptrendx would you mind opening a feature request issue as suggested by the initial post? The roadmap issue is usually for tracking purpose, and having other discussions inside makes it harder to track the features to add.

“ Let's start a discussion here about the roadmap towards 1.7.0. We are looking for:

New features that are useful to your research and development.”

This is what’s in the description of this page. I don’t think this has been strayed from.

[szha]

I was referring the the instructions just below the lines you were quoting:

If you have any item that you'd like to propose to have in the roadmap, please do:

Create (or locate existing) issue/pull request for the item, note the issue/pull request number.
Comment in this issue:

1. the above issue number,
2. one sentence of what the item is about and why it's useful to you.