-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 310
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
Remove major/minor from renumber_edgelist public functions. #2116
Conversation
@@ -186,13 +186,18 @@ def renumber(input_df, # maybe use cpdef ? | |||
shuffled_df = input_df | |||
edge_counts_32 = make_unique[vector[int]](1, num_local_edges) | |||
|
|||
shuffled_major = major_vertices.__cuda_array_interface__['data'][0] | |||
shuffled_minor = minor_vertices.__cuda_array_interface__['data'][0] | |||
if not transposed: |
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.
checking transposed
again makes it redundant since it is already done in 179. I believe idea was just to swap the column name which will swap the src column
and dst column
if transpose=True
. However, unless I am misunderstanding something, major_vertices
and minor_vertices
should be assigned shuffled_df column after checking for transposed
(not related to this PR). If not , when transpose=True
major_vertices
and minor_vertices
do not get update. Unless major_vertices
and minor_vertices
point to the same address as shuffled_df columns which I doubt.
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.
After looking at the whole code . The transpose check is already done in line 88, so this change will be doing the reverse( ignore my comment above)
@jnke2016 pointed out something I may have overlooked, so I'm re-reviewing.
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.
Looks good to me.
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.
Thanks for adding the FIXME, that's helpful.
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## branch-22.04 #2116 +/- ##
===============================================
Coverage ? 73.99%
===============================================
Files ? 157
Lines ? 10496
Branches ? 0
===============================================
Hits ? 7767
Misses ? 2729
Partials ? 0 Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
@gpucibot merge |
Partially addresses #2003
We should not use major,minor (instead of src, dst) in the public non-detail API and should use major,minor in the detail space.
The public non-detail namespace renumber_edgelist currently uses major, minor and this PR fixes this.
This PR also replaces row/col to src/dst in
single_gpu_renumber_edgelist_given_number_map
as we're aiming to consistently use src/dst instead of row/col in our public C++ API.This is possibly breaking as this PR changes the public API (but I am not aware of any non-cugraph libraries directly calling renumber_edgelist).