feat(eks): trainium instance types#29155
Conversation
|
Exemption request: I don't think integration is required here? |
aws-cdk-automation
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The pull request linter has failed. See the aws-cdk-automation comment below for failure reasons. If you believe this pull request should receive an exemption, please comment and provide a justification.
A comment requesting an exemption should contain the text Exemption Request. Additionally, if clarification is needed add Clarification Request to a comment.
it looks like it thanks. I would just ensure all INFERENTIA used have now a TRINIUM check too |
|
@tmokmss Have time for this one? pretty straight-forward.. |
tmokmss
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM. since I'm not really familiar with EKS nor Trainium, I commented only about general code quality.
Good feedback, thanks @tmokmss 👍🏼 |
|
@msambol PR looks good just some small nits highlighted in above comments, for the integration test could we add simple test like current ones for inferentia instance type: |
|
@paulhcsun possible to get this one in too? I'm going to open a slew of PRs this weekend, want to clean up what's out there now 😄 |
✅ Updated pull request passes all PRLinter validations. Dismissing previous PRLinter review.
|
@msambol looks good to me, I'm just waiting on another PR to merge and then i'll update branch and be good to approve |
AWS CodeBuild CI Report
Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository |
|
Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from main and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork). |
@freschri – It's a little hard to find docs on this but I think this is what you're after?
Closes #29131.
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license