Skip to content

[Docs] Add precision support reference page#4965

Open
adeljo-amd wants to merge 1 commit into
ROCm:developfrom
adeljo-amd:prec_support
Open

[Docs] Add precision support reference page#4965
adeljo-amd wants to merge 1 commit into
ROCm:developfrom
adeljo-amd:prec_support

Conversation

@adeljo-amd

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Motivation

The goal of this PR is to standardize the precision support reference page format across all components, while also reducing the maintenance of burden of having to manually update the YAML data file in https://rocm.docs.amd.com/en/latest/reference/precision-support.html

Technical Details

  • Each component maintains its own YAML file which will be eventually used in https://rocm.docs.amd.com/en/latest/reference/precision-support.html
  • A new precision support reference page is introduced which will not override existing data type/precision support content; it will serve as the overview/summary that will be linked in the ROCm reference page

Changelog Category

Add a CHANGELOG.md entry for any option other than Not Applicable

    • Added: New functionality.
    • Changed: Changes to existing functionality.
    • Removed: Functionality or support that has been removed. (Compared to a previous release)
    • Optimized: Component performance that has been optimized or improved.
    • Resolved Issues: Known issues from a previous version that have been resolved.
    • Not Applicable: This PR is not to be included in the changelog.

@adeljo-amd adeljo-amd requested review from a team and causten as code owners June 15, 2026 12:25
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thank you for your contribution! Since this is an external pull request, a maintainer must review PR and add the "ok-to-test" label if it is approved for testing.

tag: "migraphx"
data_types:
- type: "int8"
support: "⚠️"

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What is causing the "partial support" for int8 ?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is something that was taken from https://rocm.docs.amd.com/en/latest/reference/precision-support.html?model=migraphx that was approved when it was made - is it not right? int8 is listed in shape.hpp; should it be full support instead?

@causten causten requested a review from CharlieL7 June 15, 2026 16:34
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
name: "MIGraphX"

@CharlieL7 CharlieL7 Jun 16, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What exactly do we mean by:

while also reducing the maintenance of burden of having to manually update the YAML data file in https://rocm.docs.amd.com/en/latest/reference/precision-support.html

It looks like the MIGraphX team needs to manually update this yaml file?

@adeljo-amd adeljo-amd Jun 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This PR aims to bring that yaml file over to this repo, so you just need to update it here. In the future, that page on the ROCm docs will automatically pull the yaml files from various repos, so there won't be a need to manually update it in the ROCm repo anymore.

name: "MIGraphX"
tag: "migraphx"
data_types:
- type: "int8"

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Missing that we support the OCP MXFP4 (E2M1) datatype.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

And to clarify, int8 should be changed to "full support"?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants