-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.8k
fix gpu_id_step #7384
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?
fix gpu_id_step #7384
Conversation
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.
Summary of Changes
Hello @TomQuartz, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!
This pull request addresses a critical bug in the calculation of GPU IDs within a distributed computing environment, specifically when a gpu_id_step
greater than one is configured. The change ensures that GPU assignments are correctly derived by applying the gpu_id_step
to the combined offset from both pipeline and tensor parallelism ranks, preventing misconfigurations and enabling proper scaling across multiple GPUs.
Highlights
- Corrected GPU ID Calculation: The core logic for calculating
gpu_id
within the_launch_subprocesses
function inengine.py
has been revised. Previously, theserver_args.gpu_id_step
was only applied to the tensor parallelism (TP) rank component of the GPU offset. The fix now correctly computes a combinedgpu_offset
by summing the contributions from both pipeline parallelism (PP) and TP ranks, and then multiplies this total offset byserver_args.gpu_id_step
. This ensures accurate and consistent GPU assignment in distributed setups, particularly whengpu_id_step
is greater than 1, resolving the reported bug. - Minor Formatting Adjustment: A minor whitespace adjustment was made in an error message string related to
data_parallel_rank
within theasync_generate
function (line 266).
Using Gemini Code Assist
The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.
Invoking Gemini
You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command>
or @gemini-code-assist <command>
. Below is a summary of the supported commands.
Feature | Command | Description |
---|---|---|
Code Review | /gemini review |
Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state. |
Pull Request Summary | /gemini summary |
Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state. |
Comment | @gemini-code-assist | Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments. |
Help | /gemini help |
Displays a list of available commands. |
Customization
To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/
folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.
Limitations & Feedback
Gemini Code Assist is currently in preview and may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments to provide feedback.
You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.
Footnotes
-
Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩
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.
Code Review
The pull request fixes a bug in computing the gpu_id
when gpu_id_step
> 1. The fix involves computing the gpu_offset
separately and then multiplying it by gpu_id_step
to get the correct gpu_id
. There's a potential issue in the calculation of gpu_offset
where the multiplication by server_args.gpu_id_step
might be missing, which could lead to incorrect gpu_id
assignment.
e7ac9d0
to
52794ef
Compare
Hi @zhaochenyang20 ! Would you please take some time to review this PR? Thanks a lot. |
Motivation
There appears to be a bug in computing the
gpu_id
whengpu_id_step
>1.Example: TP=2 PP=2
gpu_id_step
=2tp_rank_range
yields 0,2, the second yields 2,4Modifications
compute the
gpu_offset
separately and multiply bygpu_id_step
Checklist