Skip to content

Conversation

@crcrpar
Copy link
Collaborator

@crcrpar crcrpar commented Dec 20, 2024

What does this PR do?

With NVIDIA/Fuser#3624, devices >= sm89 get allowed to use nvfuser executor for fp8.

@crcrpar
Copy link
Collaborator Author

crcrpar commented Dec 20, 2024

for me to be verbose, this waits on the mentioned nvfuser pr

@crcrpar crcrpar force-pushed the crpa/allow_sm89_for_fp8 branch from 2ab964e to 080d391 Compare December 23, 2024 11:40
@crcrpar
Copy link
Collaborator Author

crcrpar commented Dec 23, 2024

@jjsjann123 what would be the nvfuser version that ships the SM89 support?

@jjsjann123
Copy link
Collaborator

@jjsjann123 what would be the nvfuser version that ships the SM89 support?

You caught me! I forgot to bump nvfuser version in the PR. I'll go back and do that. So if you are making a version guard, make it 0.2.24 (nvfuser is currently at 0.2.23, and the PR is already in).

cuda_major, _ = torch.cuda.get_device_capability()
return cuda_major > 8
cuda_major, cuda_minor = torch.cuda.get_device_capability()
return (cuda_major, cuda_minor) >= (8, 9)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I realize that this is an ugly bit...

I think the full logic here should copy this: https://github.com/NVIDIA/Fuser/blob/6fa084312d7eec5c69d59f3eb3cbdd9fa72a1600/csrc/device_lower/analysis/device_version.cpp#L24-L39

But that's a lot... We should have a generic API on nvfuser side that does is_dtype_support_on_device(dtype, device_index)

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

A Python function exposed by nvFuser for this logic would be great!

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

(Even if we don't do that in this PR, an issue for it would be great)

@crcrpar crcrpar force-pushed the crpa/allow_sm89_for_fp8 branch from 080d391 to 28af668 Compare February 5, 2025 11:25
@crcrpar crcrpar force-pushed the crpa/allow_sm89_for_fp8 branch from 26b1582 to c99e048 Compare March 28, 2025 10:48
@crcrpar crcrpar closed this Aug 20, 2025
@crcrpar crcrpar deleted the crpa/allow_sm89_for_fp8 branch August 20, 2025 13:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants