Bugfix - nvbandwidth benchmark need to handle N/A value

[polarG]

Description

1. Fixed the bug that nvbandwidth benchmark need to handle 'N/A' values in nvbandwidth cmd output.
2. Replaced the input format of test cases with a list.
3. Add nvbandwidth configuration example in default config files.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 70.00000% with 18 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 85.45%. Comparing base (249e21c) to head (bd6aab2).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...erbench/benchmarks/micro_benchmarks/nvbandwidth.py	70.00%	18 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #675      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   85.61%   85.45%   -0.16%     
==========================================
  Files          99       99              
  Lines        7165     7210      +45     
==========================================
+ Hits         6134     6161      +27     
- Misses       1031     1049      +18     

Flag	Coverage Δ
cpu-python3.10-unit-test	71.14% <70.00%> (-0.70%)	⬇️
cpu-python3.7-unit-test	71.11% <69.49%> (-0.70%)	⬇️
cpu-python3.8-unit-test	71.15% <70.00%> (-0.68%)	⬇️
cuda-unit-test	83.27% <70.00%> (-0.11%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[dpower4]

@polarG , do we also handle when we run few tests that are not valid for the underlying system. Such tests results in output as "waived".
for eg: running thedevice_to_device_memcpy_read_sm on a single gpu machine results

`nvidia@localhost:/home/nvidia/nvbandwidth$ ./nvbandwidth -t 18
nvbandwidth Version: v0.5
Built from Git version: 

NOTE: This tool reports current measured bandwidth on your system.
Additional system-specific tuning may be required to achieve maximal peak bandwidth.

CUDA Runtime Version: 12040
CUDA Driver Version: 12040
Driver Version: 550.54.15

Device 0: NVIDIA GH200 480GB

Waived: 

[abuccts]

pls add test cases for the "N/A" and "Waived" cases

[polarG]

@polarG , do we also handle when we run few tests that are not valid for the underlying system. Such tests results in output as "waived". for eg: running thedevice_to_device_memcpy_read_sm on a single gpu machine results

`nvidia@localhost:/home/nvidia/nvbandwidth$ ./nvbandwidth -t 18
nvbandwidth Version: v0.5
Built from Git version: 

NOTE: This tool reports current measured bandwidth on your system.
Additional system-specific tuning may be required to achieve maximal peak bandwidth.

CUDA Runtime Version: 12040
CUDA Driver Version: 12040
Driver Version: 550.54.15

Device 0: NVIDIA GH200 480GB

Waived: 

Good point! I will try to catch this in the code.
For the waived test cases, shall we show a negative value in the report? or just add a log contain the name/index? @abuccts @dpower4

[dpower4]

@polarG , do we also handle when we run few tests that are not valid for the underlying system. Such tests results in output as "waived". for eg: running thedevice_to_device_memcpy_read_sm on a single gpu machine results

`nvidia@localhost:/home/nvidia/nvbandwidth$ ./nvbandwidth -t 18
nvbandwidth Version: v0.5
Built from Git version: 

NOTE: This tool reports current measured bandwidth on your system.
Additional system-specific tuning may be required to achieve maximal peak bandwidth.

CUDA Runtime Version: 12040
CUDA Driver Version: 12040
Driver Version: 550.54.15

Device 0: NVIDIA GH200 480GB

Waived: 

Good point! I will try to catch this in the code. For the waived test cases, shall we show a negative value in the report? or just add a log contain the name/index? @abuccts @dpower4

Its better to show the waived test in the report in line with how other failed benchmarks are treated.

[guoshzhao]

Looks good to me. One more question for docs: Any documents need to be updated to align this change?