-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2k
[None][fix] [fix] Make NCCL resource manager destructor exception-safe #10166
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?
[None][fix] [fix] Make NCCL resource manager destructor exception-safe #10166
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Ludwig Schneider <[email protected]>
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughHardens the NCCL resource manager's destructor and cleanup path to be exception-safe during static destruction. Introduces a destruction-state flag, moves resource cleanup outside the mutex, wraps cleanup and logging calls in try-catch blocks, and prevents re-entrant cleanup. Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes
Pre-merge checks and finishing touches❌ Failed checks (2 warnings)
✅ Passed checks (1 passed)
✨ Finishing touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro 📒 Files selected for processing (3)
🧰 Additional context used📓 Path-based instructions (3)**/*.{cpp,h,cu,cuh}📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (CODING_GUIDELINES.md)
Files:
**/*.h📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (CODING_GUIDELINES.md)
Files:
**/*.{cpp,h,cu,cuh,py}📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (CODING_GUIDELINES.md)
Files:
🧠 Learnings (11)📚 Learning: 2025-09-23T15:12:38.312ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-09-23T15:01:00.070ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-09-23T15:01:00.070ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-09-16T09:30:09.716ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-10-13T19:45:03.518ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-09-23T15:12:38.312ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-09-23T14:58:05.372ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-08-20T06:56:02.889ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-09-02T13:42:44.885ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-08-21T09:41:49.347ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-09-22T19:25:45.607ZApplied to files:
🧬 Code graph analysis (2)cpp/tensorrt_llm/common/ncclUtils.h (1)
cpp/tensorrt_llm/common/opUtils.cpp (1)
🪛 Cppcheck (2.18.0)cpp/tensorrt_llm/common/ncclUtils.cpp[error] 51-51: There is an unknown macro here somewhere. Configuration is required. If TRTLLM_NAMESPACE_BEGIN is a macro then please configure it. (unknownMacro) ⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (1)
🔇 Additional comments (8)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
|
/bot run |
|
PR_Github #29190 [ run ] triggered by Bot. Commit: |
|
PR_Github #29190 [ run ] completed with state
|
|
/bot run --disable-fail-fast |
|
PR_Github #29427 [ run ] triggered by Bot. Commit: |
|
PR_Github #29427 [ run ] completed with state
|
|
/bot run --disable-fail-fast |
|
Reproduce steps:
|
|
PR_Github #29464 [ run ] triggered by Bot. Commit: |
|
PR_Github #29464 [ run ] completed with state
|
|
/bot run --disable-fail-fast |
|
PR_Github #29466 [ run ] triggered by Bot. Commit: |
|
PR_Github #29466 [ run ] completed with state
|
|
/bot run --disable-fail-fast |
|
PR_Github #29489 [ run ] triggered by Bot. Commit: |
|
PR_Github #29489 [ run ] completed with state
|
|
/bot run --disable-fail-fast |
|
PR_Github #29658 [ run ] triggered by Bot. Commit: |
|
PR_Github #29658 [ run ] completed with state |
|
/bot run --disable-fail-fast |
|
PR_Github #30040 [ run ] triggered by Bot. Commit: |
|
PR_Github #30040 [ run ] completed with state |
Summary by CodeRabbit
✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.
Description
It was reported that the clean up of NCCL resources is not always clean and could end in segfaults.
I am struggling to reproduce this exact error.
But upon inspection of the code, I can see why they is a potential problem when tearing down the static ResourceManager.
In particular the unprotected access of the Logger is potentially the issue here.
I updated the code, to be a lot more conservative in the tear-down process to prevent problem in the future.
Test Coverage
No new test needed.
PR Checklist