Skip to content

[AIROCMLIR-466] Extend tuning db key with num_cu and num_chiplets#2248

Merged
mirza-halilcevic merged 6 commits intodevelopfrom
tuning-db-key
Feb 24, 2026
Merged

[AIROCMLIR-466] Extend tuning db key with num_cu and num_chiplets#2248
mirza-halilcevic merged 6 commits intodevelopfrom
tuning-db-key

Conversation

@mirza-halilcevic
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@mirza-halilcevic mirza-halilcevic commented Feb 21, 2026

Motivation

In addition to architecture and problem config, use number of CUs and number of chiplets as keys into a tuning database.

Technical Details

Appropriate changes made to perfRunner.py.

Submission Checklist

@mirza-halilcevic mirza-halilcevic changed the title [AIROCMLIR-466] Extend tuning db key with num_cu and num_chiplets. [AIROCMLIR-466] Extend tuning db key with num_cu and num_chiplets Feb 21, 2026
@mirza-halilcevic mirza-halilcevic marked this pull request as ready for review February 23, 2026 12:07
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview

This PR extends the tuning database key structure to include hardware-specific parameters (num_cu and num_chiplets) in addition to architecture and problem configuration. This enables more precise performance tuning by distinguishing entries based on the number of compute units and chiplets available on the GPU.

Changes:

  • Extended tuning database key from (arch, config) to (arch, num_cu, num_chiplets, config)
  • Updated parser to support three database formats: legacy (3 fields), v2 (4+ fields), and v3 (5+ fields)
  • Modified all tuning database lookups and updates to use the new 4-tuple key structure

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Comment thread mlir/utils/performance/perfRunner.py
Comment thread mlir/utils/performance/perfRunner.py
@mirza-halilcevic mirza-halilcevic merged commit 3ba8871 into develop Feb 24, 2026
7 of 14 checks passed
@mirza-halilcevic mirza-halilcevic deleted the tuning-db-key branch February 24, 2026 09:53
cursor Bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 13, 2026
Automated weekly review of merged PRs #2234 #2240 #2248 #2249 #2251
#2254 #2257 #2258 #2259 #2270 #2271.

Identifies 6 areas with weak test coverage and meaningful business risk:
1. ConcurrentQueue (no unit tests, multi-threaded, silent deadlock risk)
2. parse_tuning_db_line / read_tuning_db key schema change (no Python tests)
3. BooleanElementwiseConverter missing f16/unsigned dtype coverage
4. Attention MaxNumFOp vs MaximumFOp NaN correctness (no dedicated test)
5. firstCausalMaskIter off-by-one risk (no non-trivial shape test)
6. Sliding window attention edge cases (windowSize=0/>=seqLen/unaligned)

The GitHub discussion API returned FORBIDDEN (read-only CI token);
analysis committed here as a permanent record.

Co-authored-by: Djordje Antic <djordje.antic@amd.com>
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