Package Details: opencl-amd 1:6.3.2-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/opencl-amd.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: opencl-amd
Description: ROCm components repackaged from AMD's Ubuntu releases (ROCr runtime, ROCm runtime, HIP runtime) - This package is intended to work along with the free amdgpu stack.
Upstream URL: http://www.amd.com
Keywords: amd amdgpu computing gpgpu opencl radeon
Licenses: custom:AMD
Conflicts: amd-smi-lib, comgr, hip, hip-dev, hip-doc, hip-runtime-amd, hip-samples, hipcc, hsa-amd-aqlprofile, hsa-rocr, hsa-rocr-dev, libdrm-amdgpu-amdgpu1, openmp-extras-runtime, rocdecode, rocdecode-dev, rocjpeg, rocjpeg-dev, rocm-cmake, rocm-core, rocm-dbgapi, rocm-debug-agent, rocm-device-libs, rocm-gdb, rocm-hip-runtime, rocm-language-runtime, rocm-ocl-icd, rocm-opencl, rocm-opencl-dev, rocm-opencl-icd-loader, rocm-opencl-runtime, rocm-smi-lib, rocm-utils, rocminfo, rocprofiler, rocprofiler-dev, rocprofiler-plugins, rocprofiler-register, roctracer, roctracer-dev
Provides: amd-smi-lib, comgr, hip, hip-dev, hip-doc, hip-runtime-amd, hip-samples, hipcc, hsa-amd-aqlprofile, hsa-rocr, hsa-rocr-dev, libdrm-amdgpu-amdgpu1, opencl-driver, openmp-extras-runtime, rocdecode, rocdecode-dev, rocjpeg, rocjpeg-dev, rocm-cmake, rocm-core, rocm-dbgapi, rocm-debug-agent, rocm-device-libs, rocm-gdb, rocm-hip-runtime, rocm-language-runtime, rocm-ocl-icd, rocm-opencl, rocm-opencl-dev, rocm-opencl-icd-loader, rocm-opencl-runtime, rocm-smi-lib, rocm-utils, rocminfo, rocprofiler, rocprofiler-dev, rocprofiler-plugins, rocprofiler-register, roctracer, roctracer-dev
Submitter: grmat
Maintainer: sperg512 (luciddream)
Last Packager: luciddream
Votes: 132
Popularity: 0.21
First Submitted: 2016-12-01 03:45 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2025-01-29 20:12 (UTC)

Required by (128)

Sources (38)

Pinned Comments

nho1ix commented on 2023-12-29 08:43 (UTC) (edited on 2024-02-10 07:13 (UTC) by nho1ix)

Note for anyone who has a Polaris GPU (Radeon RX 5xx) debugging issues with this package; Packages that use OpenCL like clinfo or davinci-resolve-studio will need you to downgrade opencl-amd to 1:5.7.1-1 as well as amdgpu-pro-oglp to 23.10_1620044-1 to avoid coredumps & segfaults.

DVR would not open unless these 2 packages were downgraded (along with their dependencies). Had to figure it out the hard way after hours using valgrind and rebooting over and over. Hopefully someone else will not have to pull their hair out trying to resolve their issue.

luciddream commented on 2021-12-26 15:14 (UTC) (edited on 2025-01-29 20:13 (UTC) by luciddream)

Current release is for ROCm 6.3.2 opencl-amd package includes only OpenCL / HIP runtime. You also need to use opencl-amd-dev package for ROCm LLVM compiler, OpenCL and HIP SDK. Please relog / reboot after installing so your PATH gets updated

There are now official packages available: rocm-opencl-sdk for OpenCL and rocm-hip-sdk for HIP - You might have better luck with these packages depending on your GPU.

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 .. 79 Next › Last »

Ashark commented on 2022-03-23 14:56 (UTC)

Do you know where is their mailing list? Another source of communication with them I think may be the email they used for packages (in control information).

luciddream commented on 2022-03-23 14:07 (UTC) (edited on 2022-03-23 14:09 (UTC) by luciddream)

@Ashark the pages you linked, have download links to deb files that include the 50002 number. Since the original deb is a package that includes all files for AMDGPU(Pro) and ROCm, I think it's better to keep one version string for all of them, and that's the version string from the amdgpu-install file, which is what people use to install it on official supported distros. In the end, what AUR helpers or makepkg does is create a package that uses this versioning scheme to make a similar package to the Ubuntu / CentOS one.

My assumption for why they are doing this is that while the human readable driver release is 21.50.2, that gives them the freedom to silently release an update when something goes wrong, without the need to create new pages for it. But maybe it's wrong assumption. I'm open to discussing it further and removing both numbers if there is feedback from an AMD employee (maybe we can post a question on their mailing list), but I think 21.50.2.50002-1 will be following their current reasoning for package versioning.

Ashark commented on 2022-03-23 13:23 (UTC) (edited on 2022-03-23 13:25 (UTC) by Ashark)

from the AMD drivers page

Can you please link it? Because I only see the pages I mentioned. For example, the rx590 product page, the 21.50.2 release page.

50002 is not the build number, it's ROCm version number

I understand that. I saw in PKGBUILD. But where I can see it as a user? Can you edit the url upstream link so it is more precise?

I assume that AMD developers have a reason to link ROCm version with the AMDGPU version

Maybe.

about 90% of the package is ROCm related files

Oh, I see now. Then yes, the 50002 should stay in the version number. But then another question. If this package is actually rocm, than where did that 21.50.2 came from? Should not this package version be like just 50002_72-1?

luciddream commented on 2022-03-23 12:55 (UTC)

@Ashark The deb I linked is the one from the AMD drivers page. 50002 is not the build number, it's ROCm version number so I assume that AMD developers have a reason to link ROCm version with the AMDGPU version. For opencl-amd it makes even more sense, because about 90% of the package is ROCm related files, and not amdgpu files.

So I disagree with you, I think the correct version should be 21.50.2.50002-1 like the upstream version AMD is using. Worst case should be 21.50.2.50002_1384495-1 but I think it would be fine to remove the minor version.

p.s Unless an AMD employee clarifies the versioning scheme I think all we can make is assumptions on why it is like this.

Ashark commented on 2022-03-23 12:12 (UTC)

@luciddream I do not get you, where did you see that "21.50.2.50002" besides the one of debs you linked? In the gpu page I see they mention releases just as "21.50.2", without build number. And in the actual packages they use "21.50.2-1384496", see the Packages file I linked in previous comment or see any control file for any [there are few exceptions, like amf] deb package from repo. So the only correct way I see is to use scheme like I wrote before: 21.50.2_1384495-1.

luciddream commented on 2022-03-22 23:43 (UTC) (edited on 2022-03-23 00:00 (UTC) by luciddream)

Hi @Ashark I took a look and the upstream version (both for CentOS and Ubuntu) is 21.50.2.50002. So I guess I can remove the minor version .1384495 on the next update, but it will still look almost the same. I'm not sure if that helps you.

edit: to make things "worse", there are two amdgpu-install files, one that includes the minor version and one that doesn't, and I'm too sleepy to check their differences now. So I'm not sure that even removing the minor version will be OK.

@redshoe I didn't ignore you but I didn't have time to check yet. I think that you mean the PAL drivers though. This package is already using the legacy AMDGPU-PRO drivers, but I don't have an older GPU to check what works and what not.

Ashark commented on 2022-03-22 22:49 (UTC)

Can you please fix versioning scheme? Currently it is like 21.50.2.50002.1384495-1, but it should be like 21.50.2_1384495-1. I want to compare opencl-amd and amdgpu-pro-libgl versions in davinci-resolve-checker, and it would be easier if version schemes just matched.
Regarding the underscore instead of dot in last block: see https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/PKGBUILD#pkgver. It says if the author of the software uses hyphen (-), replace it with an underscore (_). And AMD versions their packages with hyphen, like Version: 21.50.2-1384496. You can see it in Packages file: http://repo.radeon.com/amdgpu/21.50.2/ubuntu/dists/bionic/proprietary/binary-amd64/Packages.

redshoe commented on 2022-03-19 16:27 (UTC)

@luciddream Thanks. Another question. Are newer AMDPRO drivers don't have opencl anymore, as in no more opencl support for GPUs from the AMDPRO-GPU driver stack?

luciddream commented on 2022-03-15 08:18 (UTC)

@redshoe I don't think so, libtinfo5 is required by ROCm. I don't think you can "trick" it like that.

@limsandy I think next ROCm release will be in April so you can try again then. If AMD doesn't have that information noone else will unfortunately :)

It would be nice if more people can verify what @ghostbuster is saying, does the path get expanded for you in /etc/profile.d/opencl-amd.sh ? Because I don't see any issues on my PC.

redshoe commented on 2022-03-15 01:42 (UTC) (edited on 2022-03-15 01:43 (UTC) by redshoe)

@luciddream is it possible to use libtinfo.so.6 instead of libtinfo.so.5? And maybe create a symbolic link? If so, can we prevent installing ncurses5-compat-libs, and just install ncurses6.3-2?

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 .. 79 Next › Last »