You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
Use LibTorch Stable ABI to build 1 wheel across multiple PyTorch versions #532
Now that the limited libtorch stable ABI (https://docs.pytorch.org/docs/stable/notes/libtorch_stable_abi.html) has matured some more, it may be ripe time to use it to benefit the hf kernels community! What do I mean? By migrating a kernel to use the libtorch ABI-stable APIs, you can now build one wheel that can run across multiple PyTorch versions. Instead of building 3 * N wheels to satisfy across torch versions 2.9, 2.10, and 2.11, you can build N wheels instead, thirding the total build time to maintain a kernel.
For a list of available APIs + which torch version they've been available, see https://docs.pytorch.org/cppdocs/stable.html. From my understanding it looks like kernels-community supports the latest 3 torch versions, meaning 2.9+ for now. Some kernels may not be able to target 2.9 and may have to wait for 2.12 is released to target 2.10, but I know for a fact that FA3 can be built stably 2.9+! Meaning from torch 2.9+, you'd not need to recompile for any new torch version anymore, making maintaining https://huggingface.co/kernels-community/flash-attn3/tree/main/build much chiller.
This issue is to gauge interest and see what we can do already. I propose the following:
A. Start with low hanging fruit like FA3
B. Identify any other low hanging fruit kernels (with Claude/LLM) and which kernels simply have to wait a release.
C. Identify if there's anything our APIs are missing + flag to PyTorch/me (also Claudable, roughly).
D. Go one by one and simplify the build story + save build resources!
Thanks for opening this issue! We should really do this, slashing the number of builds for large kernels by three would be a huge win. I created the following issues to track the required changes on the kernels/kernel-builder side:
Activity
danieldk commentedon Apr 8, 2026
Thanks for opening this issue! We should really do this, slashing the number of builds for large kernels by three would be a huge win. I created the following issues to track the required changes on the
kernels/kernel-builder side:huggingface/kernels#429
huggingface/kernels#430
danieldk commentedon May 22, 2026
Initial support in kernel-builder/kernels: huggingface/kernels#575