UCT/CUDA: Advertise MNNVL inter-node capability with shm device type #10141
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
tvegas1
force-pushed
the
cuda_netdev
branch
from
6324359
to
e5481de
Compare
tvegas1
changed the title
iyastreb
reviewed
Sep 10, 2024
| } uct_tl_resource_desc_t; | ||
|
|
||
| #define UCT_TL_RESOURCE_FLAG_INTER_NODE UCS_BIT(0) /**< Inter-node capability */ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does it make sense to declare a enum with name, and reference that name in the flags field documentation?
Otherwise it's hard to understand afterwards which enum/values are supposed to be set
|
@yosefe, for ABI compatibility, we could add something like |
This was referenced Sep 17, 2024
|
Implementing with #10161 instead. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What
Keep cuda device type as SHM and advertise MNNVL as SHM with inter-node capability to avoid
cuda_ipctransport deactivation when specifyingUCX_NET_DEVICES.Why ?
We do not need to be able to list/exclude MNNVL from/with
UCX_NET_DEVICES=^cudaas there is already the specific configurationENABLE_MNNVLto control that.How ?
Sanity tested, but not end-to-end tested.