-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 69
Add CUPTI profiling to direct bindings #5324
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
!test |
Description
Changes walkthrough 📝
PR Reviewer Guide 🔍Here are some key observations to aid the review process:
|
uint32_t seg_id, | ||
uint32_t corr_id) { | ||
FusionProfiler& fp = get(); | ||
NVF_CHECK( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@Priya2698 This is the assertion triggered by test_fusion_profiler
when I remove pytest.mark.skipif
. I'm hitting this check for a correlation_id not tied to the correlationId for the KernelProfile.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
See #4685
This PR adds support for CUPTI profiling to direct bindings. Instead of calling two functions
fd.execute(profile=True); data = fd.profile
, direct bindings uses a context manager namedPythonProfiler
. This approach allows profiling any CPPExecutor
or the pythonFusionDefinition
without creating a separateexecute
function for profiling.Example