-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 545
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
[REVIEW] FIL: Add optimization parameter blocks_per_sm
for all but the tiniest models
#3032
[REVIEW] FIL: Add optimization parameter blocks_per_sm
for all but the tiniest models
#3032
Conversation
Please update the changelog in order to start CI tests. View the gpuCI docs here. |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## branch-0.17 #3032 +/- ##
===============================================
+ Coverage 70.67% 70.68% +0.01%
===============================================
Files 197 197
Lines 15573 15576 +3
===============================================
+ Hits 11006 11010 +4
+ Misses 4567 4566 -1
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
blocks_per_sm
blocks_per_sm
blocks_per_sm
for all but tinyest models
blocks_per_sm
for all but tinyest modelsblocks_per_sm
for all but tiniest models
blocks_per_sm
for all but tiniest modelsblocks_per_sm
for all but the tiniest models
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.
The code looks good, just minor technical comments.
However, some C++ tests for the new parameter are needed.
now depends on #3088 |
…ost blockIdx.x uses
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.
Approved, provided that the review comments are addressed.
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.
It would be nice to have a python test in the PR, as we are updating the cython file here.
@Salonijain27 However, there's no new Python functionality in this PR (i.e. no external API changes), so I think existing tests should be sufficient. |
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.
Lgtm, just added a suggestion
rerun tests: random noise in cuml/test/test_random_forest.py:264 |
rerun tests: ChecksumMismatchError: Conda detected a mismatch between the expected content and downloaded content |
No description provided.