perf(aggregation): Prevent cuda sync in normalize#557
Merged
ValerianRey merged 2 commits intomainfrom Feb 5, 2026
Merged
Conversation
7fb2c75 to
fcd865a
Compare
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
PierreQuinton
approved these changes
Feb 5, 2026
Contributor
PierreQuinton
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Very nice, we should also keep that in mind because I doubt this is the only place we do something like that (the aggregators maybe).
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
With the previous implementation,
normalizecauses a cuda synchronization. It's not a big issue at all, because we need a cuda synchronization right after, during the call toproject_weights, because it's always done on CPU. But I think it's good for three reasons:There might be a slight performance drop due to using
torch.wherewhich is element-wise with a condition that is scalar (and thus broadcasted). But since the gramian is never huge (especially if using UPGrad), this is really fine IMO. In my profiling, thistorch.wheretakes 0.028 ms with batch size of 64.So this is extremely minor but positive IMO.