Also compare batch measurements in nvbench_compare.py#263
Also compare batch measurements in nvbench_compare.py#263bernhardmgruber wants to merge 2 commits intoNVIDIA:mainfrom
Conversation
| if has_batch_data: | ||
| if ( | ||
| abs(frac_diff_batch) <= 0.01 | ||
| ): # TODO(bgruber): what value to use here? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have no idea, let's get some input internally on that.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe just pick a sensible default and let the user override with command-line opts?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should use min_noise estimated from abs(frac_diff_batch) <= min_noise if available, like we do for cold measurements, and use yellow tint if min_noise is not available.
Perhaps in case when has_batch_data is True, min_noise should always be available.
|
I like the idea of splitting them to a new line, I think it'd be cleaner. Or making them into separate tables? That way you could still quickly scan a column to check for outliers. That'd be harder if the timings were alternating cold/batch. |
d140027 to
f77d001
Compare
|
@oleksandr-pavlyk I would still like to consider this:
But I also don't have bandwidth to work on it for now. We can leave the PR until I need to compare batch measurements again and get annoyed why they don't show up :) |
Fixes: #247
Cold and batch measurements can sometimes differ substantially, so we want to show both. An example is kernels using PDL (Programmatic Dependent Launch).
Here is a comparison of DeviceTransform with and without PDL (see also NVIDIA/cccl#5249):
The table becomes a bit unwieldy. We could consider dropping the
DiffandB Diffcolumns to improve the situation. Alternatively, we could emit two rows per benchmark.