-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.4k
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
Introduce TritonService and workflows #32576
Changes from all commits
974cf5f
59c5ac2
f4ffb8e
3983d32
22040d3
6374f35
0232dc0
3d75f3e
4cd5c91
ac3d194
5c7b0a1
51bbe5f
c2e5109
0557185
a2addb9
4f6345d
7a73dca
d540930
1a3abbc
18222ba
e5825fa
c366b15
c57021a
b289164
c5832fc
fbeacab
daa7238
dbe6b0f
c3d4085
4ad2933
b2f4702
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@ | ||
import FWCore.ParameterSet.Config as cms | ||
|
||
from Configuration.ProcessModifiers.enableSonicTriton_cff import enableSonicTriton | ||
|
||
# collect all SonicTriton-related process modifiers here | ||
allSonicTriton = cms.ModifierChain(enableSonicTriton) | ||
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ | ||
import FWCore.ParameterSet.Config as cms | ||
|
||
enableSonicTriton = cms.Modifier() |
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -14,3 +14,9 @@ def _addCUDAServices(process): | |
|
||
from Configuration.ProcessModifiers.gpu_cff import gpu | ||
modifyConfigurationStandardSequencesServicesAddCUDAServices_ = gpu.makeProcessModifier(_addCUDAServices) | ||
|
||
# load TritonService when SONIC workflow is enabled | ||
def _addTritonService(process): | ||
process.load("HeterogeneousCore.SonicTriton.TritonService_cff") | ||
from Configuration.ProcessModifiers.enableSonicTriton_cff import enableSonicTriton | ||
modifyConfigurationStandardSequencesServicesAddTritonService_ = enableSonicTriton.makeProcessModifier(_addTritonService) | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. In principle loading of (this is my last comment) There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'd prefer to keep it here if that's acceptable. |
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.
In #32272 a customize function was preferred.
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.
This does not prevent the use of customization functions where desired. However, there may be other modifiers required as well (e.g. the
mlpf
modifier in #32048). The goal here is to facilitate a single Triton-enabled special workflow, with all available producers included. (Customization functions can also be included in the workflow definition directly, or viamakeProcessModifier()
.)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.
How would the Modifier be used then? Within production configuration fragments, non-production configurations fragments, customize functions, something else?
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.
Right now, this
allSonicTriton
modifier is just intended to simplify the special workflow setup inConfiguration/PyReleaseValidation/python/upgradeWorkflowComponents.py
.I could envision a similar aggregating customize function like
customizeAllSonicTriton
to aggregate any and all customize functions, and then the special workflow would just need that one function. That isn't introduced here because there's nothing to test it with (yet).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.
I'm still a bit confused by the purpose of these two Modifiers (now). In #32272 the motivation to favor customize functions was to avoid putting customization for "R&D and testing" into production configuration fragments. If the behavior is customized with a function, I don't see the added value of centrally defined Modifiers.
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.
For example:
#32048 introduces a modifier
mlpf
† to activate the ML ParticleFlow. There is also a SonicTriton version of the MLPF producer that will be introduced. Even if that producer is activated via a customize function, themlpf
modifier will still be needed to include it in a workflow. Therefore, it is worthwhile to be able to aggregate multiple relevant modifiers for a SonicTriton-enabled workflow.† because this "policy" of using customize functions for R&D was just invented last month to placate certain partisans and is rarely applied anywhere else, but I digress.