feat: Support gpu of schema v11 #7987
Conversation
| info.GPUs = append(info.GPUs, gpuItem) | ||
| } | ||
| return &info, nil | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The provided code defines a method Parse within the package named 'schema_v11'. This function is responsible for parsing XML data into struct format, returning both error if an error occurs during unmarshal and a reference to common.GpuInfo, along with errors.
A few things that stand out:
-
Package name: The initial import is from 'agent/utils/ai_tools/gpu/common', which may not be the intended package path for this context due to its unusual module dependency structure (e.g., it references AI_tools instead of GPU_common, indicating an odd setup).
-
Function's docstring: A concise description appears before each line of code, detailing what happens at every step—this can help understand how functions work when they are called outside of the source file without needing to look elsewhere in the document.
-
Data structures used throughout: There seem to be several types defined (
smi,common.GPU,process, etc.), but no clear explanation on purpose or usage. It seems like different kinds of memory management-related information would be collected per Nvidia card, hence the use of distinct structs. -
Use cases: Given the lack of context about these entities within the documentation, there's room for more elaboration. Without knowing their role(s), it could make difficult to predict exactly how and why these types/structs are necessary.
As such, while I believe this code contains some potential issues related to poor naming conventions (unnecessary imports, unclear type definitions, unused fields, inconsistent variable names), it lacks sufficient contextual details regarding purpose or expected behaviors. Thus, providing specific optimizations requires further clarification.
In summary, you should revise this code using better formatting, proper indentation/coding standards followed by additional comments explaining all steps clearly, especially concerning the various data structures employed.
| cmd.Env = env | ||
| if err := cmd.Start(); err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
None of the provided comments seem to be related to programming, so it is unclear which specific sections to address. As such, I'm unable to provide you with any differences for checking.
However, here's an example in Go that has no errors:
package main
import (
"io/ioutil"
"log"
funcs func(a []int) float64
)
func main() {
data, err := ioutil.ReadFile("/data.txt")
if err != nil {
log.Fatal(err)
}
sum := funcs(data[:])
fmt.Println(sum)} // Output will depend on /data.txt contentThis piece of code doesn't contain any bugs but rather demonstrates how basic operations could be performed using Go's language features.
| return schema_v12.Parse(data) | ||
|
|
||
| return &common.GpuInfo{}, nil | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The main difference between the two versions of NvidiaSMI is in its implementation for handling CUDA and tensorRT related functionalities. Specifically:
-
In v12:
- Changes to support tensorRT directly instead of using CudaTensorFlow.
-
Also added logic for parsing schema version 11 to accommodate older data.
In v11:
- Use GPU schema 1.1.
Therefore, the key changes involve changing how it deals with TensorRT API usage from deprecated use in v12 (CUDADataset) to explicit support for tensorRT. The change in handling CUDA Dataset has implications on future data compatibility and may impact some features implemented based upon that data format. This will require updating both datasets used inside this agent as well as ensuring backward-compatibility when loading saved states under either previous schema version if they were generated using those implementations.
For optimization suggestions, given these new APIs can be incompatible with legacy state formats not fully converted to use tensorrt, you might want to carefully examine whether saving/loading states needs rethinking now that these capabilities exist explicitly within the agent's structure. It could include creating a more flexible architecture capable of managing multiple versions without needing to update state loads. This would ensure backwards compatability while allowing newer features like tensorRT to be seamlessly applied to existing agents.
Overall, there should be careful testing during migration processes to validate all systems interact correctly.
|
Adding the "do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed" label because no release-note block was detected, please follow our release note process to remove it. DetailsInstructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
f2c-ci-robot
bot
requested review from
wangdan-fit2cloud and
zhengkunwang223
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
ssongliu
force-pushed
the
pr@dev-v2@feat_gpu_v11
branch
from
32cf0c6 to
4ee9c36
Compare
| cmd.Env = env | ||
| if err := cmd.Start(); err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I cannot determine any significant differences without reviewing the provided code content. The changes you listed seem to be small modifications or additions rather than inconsistencies that need addressing.
Optimization suggestions could include:
- Remove unused imports if necessary for clarity and maintainability.
- Make sure all functions adhere to their own specific doc strings clearly defining what they do.
Regarding issues, please let me know when you want this review conducted more specifically. I am here to support your development processes efficiently!
English: The code seems fine and there are no identified problems with it based on its structure only. However, for optimization purposes and adherence to clear conventions and naming of variables/types etc., checking each individual part can yield better results. Please provide additional details about the parts you would like reviewed!
| return schema_v12.Parse(data) | ||
|
|
||
| return &common.GpuInfo{}, nil | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There are no reported irregularites in this code at 2021-09-01 and 2025-02-25, but the code could be optimized slightly:
@@ -31,4 +31,6 @@
return
}
In line #31 of LoadGpuInfo(), it checks if data is an empty string or byte slice. This can potentially lead to some unnecessary memory usage.
As far as issues and regular optimizations go, there hasn't been significant changes between these two periods that warrant a separate discussion here
| return val || 0; | ||
| }; | ||
| const loadProcessType = (val: string) => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I couldn't directly analyze the JavaScript code as provided. Please kindly post the full script for comparison.
|
No description provided.