fix --sanity-check-only and --module-only for UCX plugins

[Flamefire]

(created using eb --new-pr)

The self.plugins variable was initialized empty and only populated in the configure step. This leads to errors in the sanity check when the configure step is not run.
Convert to a property which is lazy-initialized.

Note: I was thinking about querying the dependencies instead of using get_software_root as this implementation might fail when self.plugins is accessed without the modules loaded. But I think this cannot happen, can it?

[boegel]

@boegelbot please test @ generoso
EB_ARGS="UCX-CUDA-1.14.1-GCCcore-12.3.0-CUDA-12.1.1.eb UCX-CUDA-1.10.0-GCCcore-10.3.0-CUDA-11.3.1.eb"

[boegelbot]

@boegel: Request for testing this PR well received on login1

PR test command 'EB_PR=3007 EB_ARGS="UCX-CUDA-1.14.1-GCCcore-12.3.0-CUDA-12.1.1.eb UCX-CUDA-1.10.0-GCCcore-10.3.0-CUDA-11.3.1.eb" EB_CONTAINER= EB_REPO=easybuild-easyblocks /opt/software/slurm/bin/sbatch --job-name test_PR_3007 --ntasks=4 ~/boegelbot/eb_from_pr_upload_generoso.sh' executed!

• exit code: 0
• output:

Submitted batch job 11787

Test results coming soon (I hope)...

- notification for comment with ID 1737516669 processed

Message to humans: this is just bookkeeping information for me,
it is of no use to you (unless you think I have a bug, which I don't).

[boegelbot]

Test report by @boegelbot

Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)

• SUCCESS UCX-CUDA-1.14.1-GCCcore-12.3.0-CUDA-12.1.1.eb
• SUCCESS UCX-CUDA-1.10.0-GCCcore-10.3.0-CUDA-11.3.1.eb

Build succeeded for 2 out of 2 (2 easyconfigs in total)
cns1 - Linux Rocky Linux 8.5, x86_64, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2667 v3 @ 3.20GHz (haswell), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/boegelbot/b229d817b40e9f0e6e838c06f4751352 for a full test report.

[boegel]

Test report by @boegel

Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)

• FAIL (build issue) UCX-CUDA-1.13.1-GCCcore-12.2.0-CUDA-12.0.0.eb (partial log available at https://gist.github.com/boegel/4981f4281973ae0836ee2ac126abd8ca)
• FAIL (build issue) UCX-CUDA-1.11.2-GCCcore-11.2.0-CUDA-11.5.2.eb (partial log available at https://gist.github.com/boegel/8fa1d7df0e183b433ab0e6e263ec18e1)

Build succeeded for 0 out of 2 (2 easyconfigs in total)
node3157.skitty.os - Linux RHEL 8.6, x86_64, Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6140 CPU @ 2.30GHz (skylake_avx512), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/boegel/e9cda3e08b584888f4a38ec738d9a7c1 for a full test report.

[boegel]

Hmm, looks OK, but still hitting a problem with --sanity-check-only, see last test report.

The problem here is that until the parent sanity_check_step is called, the modules for dependencies are not loaded yet.
We need a workaround like in #2828 (+ #2865) for that to work.

Another approach could indeed be to not rely on get_software_root, but directly query the dependencies via self.cfg.dependencies().

[Flamefire]

Another approach could indeed be to not rely on get_software_root, but directly query the dependencies via self.cfg.dependencies().

Done that, looks simpler although now the code in plugins and configure_step is slightly different.

[akesandgren]

ping @boegel Can you test this again?

[Flamefire]

BTW: Given that we use dep['name'] for dep in self.cfg.dependencies() already in several places does it maybe make sense to add a property dependency_names to EasyConfig in framework wrapping that? Might be slower for repeated uses compared to storing in a set but makes usage easier

[boegel]

@Flamefire Yes, makes sense, we should be using that more often since it helps with keeping easyblocks compatible with --module-only and --sanity-check-only.

Are you up for opening a PR for that?

[Flamefire]

Are you up for opening a PR for that?

easybuilders/easybuild-framework#4360

[boegel]

Test report by @boegel

Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)

• SUCCESS UCX-CUDA-1.10.0-GCCcore-10.3.0-CUDA-11.3.1.eb
• SUCCESS UCX-CUDA-1.11.0-GCCcore-11.2.0-CUDA-11.4.1.eb
• SUCCESS UCX-CUDA-1.11.2-GCCcore-11.2.0-CUDA-11.4.1.eb
• SUCCESS UCX-CUDA-1.11.2-GCCcore-11.2.0-CUDA-11.5.2.eb
• SUCCESS UCX-CUDA-1.12.1-GCCcore-11.3.0-CUDA-11.7.0.eb
• SUCCESS UCX-CUDA-1.13.1-GCCcore-12.2.0-CUDA-12.0.0.eb
• SUCCESS UCX-CUDA-1.14.1-GCCcore-12.3.0-CUDA-12.1.1.eb

Build succeeded for 7 out of 7 (7 easyconfigs in total)
node3100.skitty.os - Linux RHEL 8.8, x86_64, Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6140 CPU @ 2.30GHz (skylake_avx512), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/boegel/e8bd87c0934af93f979ebdabb301e909 for a full test report.

edit this was using --module-only

[boegel]

Test report by @boegel

Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)

• SUCCESS UCX-CUDA-1.10.0-GCCcore-10.3.0-CUDA-11.3.1.eb
• SUCCESS UCX-CUDA-1.11.0-GCCcore-11.2.0-CUDA-11.4.1.eb
• SUCCESS UCX-CUDA-1.11.2-GCCcore-11.2.0-CUDA-11.4.1.eb
• SUCCESS UCX-CUDA-1.11.2-GCCcore-11.2.0-CUDA-11.5.2.eb
• SUCCESS UCX-CUDA-1.12.1-GCCcore-11.3.0-CUDA-11.7.0.eb
• SUCCESS UCX-CUDA-1.13.1-GCCcore-12.2.0-CUDA-12.0.0.eb
• SUCCESS UCX-CUDA-1.14.1-GCCcore-12.3.0-CUDA-12.1.1.eb

Build succeeded for 7 out of 7 (7 easyconfigs in total)
node3100.skitty.os - Linux RHEL 8.8, x86_64, Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6140 CPU @ 2.30GHz (skylake_avx512), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/boegel/f6595f684ca9923af14e60f9944d99b6 for a full test report.

edit: this was using --sanity-check-only

[boegel]

Test report by @boegel

Overview of tested easyconfigs (in order)

• SUCCESS UCX-CUDA-1.10.0-GCCcore-10.3.0-CUDA-11.3.1.eb
• SUCCESS UCX-CUDA-1.11.0-GCCcore-11.2.0-CUDA-11.4.1.eb
• SUCCESS UCX-CUDA-1.11.2-GCCcore-11.2.0-CUDA-11.4.1.eb
• SUCCESS UCX-CUDA-1.11.2-GCCcore-11.2.0-CUDA-11.5.2.eb
• SUCCESS UCX-CUDA-1.12.1-GCCcore-11.3.0-CUDA-11.7.0.eb
• SUCCESS UCX-CUDA-1.13.1-GCCcore-12.2.0-CUDA-12.0.0.eb
• SUCCESS UCX-CUDA-1.14.1-GCCcore-12.3.0-CUDA-12.1.1.eb

Build succeeded for 7 out of 7 (7 easyconfigs in total)
node3100.skitty.os - Linux RHEL 8.8, x86_64, Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6140 CPU @ 2.30GHz (skylake_avx512), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/boegel/88d49e8fd074e2f8c0bb5ec092ebb4c5 for a full test report.