[UR][L0v2] Add graph support for batched queue by KFilipek · Pull Request #21324 · intel/llvm

KFilipek · 2026-02-19T13:07:12Z

This PR adds support for graph capture and execution in the Level Zero v2 batched queue implementation.

Changes:

Add command list determination mechanism that switches between immediate and regular command lists based on graph
capture state
Implement previously unsupported graph API methods:
- queueBeginGraphCapteExp() - begin graph capture
- queueBeginCapteIntoGraphExp() - begin capture into existing graph
- queueEndGraphCapteExp() - end graph capture
- queueIsGraphCapteEnabledExp() - check capture status
- enqueueGraphExp() - execute captured graph
Update operations to use appropriate command list and event pool during graph capture

EuphoricThinking · 2026-03-27T13:00:07Z

+  ur_bool_t graph_supported = false;
+  ASSERT_SUCCESS(urDeviceGetInfo(
+      device, UR_DEVICE_INFO_GRAPH_RECORD_AND_REPLAY_SUPPORT_EXP,
+      sizeof(graph_supported), &graph_supported, nullptr));
+
+  if (!graph_supported) {


I think this part could be moved to a helper method.

EuphoricThinking · 2026-03-30T12:33:43Z

setGraphCapture() is not set to true here, but it is set to false in ur_queue_batched_t::queueEndGraphCapteExp(). Is it intentional?

Fixed — setGraphCapture(true) is now called at line 1048 in queueBeginCapteIntoGraphExp, symmetrically with the false in queueEndGraphCapteExp. Both begin variants set the flag.

EuphoricThinking · 2026-03-30T12:38:01Z

markIssuedCommandInBatch() is intended to be used only with regular lists. Are we sure that getListManager() does not return an immediate list? According to this comment and this comment, it is likely that we work on an immediate list here.

markIssuedCommandInBatch() now returns early when isGraphCaptureActive() is true (lines 164–168). During capture, commands go to the immediate list, so there's nothing to track in the batch counter.

EuphoricThinking · 2026-03-30T12:59:10Z

Is it possible to record queueFlush() or queueFinish() on the graph?

I believe not

EuphoricThinking · 2026-03-30T13:01:44Z

We could verify whether the data is correctly written to the buffer.

EuphoricThinking · 2026-04-02T13:09:32Z

 ur_result_t ur_queue_batched_t::queueFlush() {
  auto batchLocked = currentCmdLists.lock();

  if (batchLocked->isActiveBatchEmpty()) {


I think we should first check whether the graph capture mode is active, and then, if active - enqueue the graph, return from the function.

I might be wrong, see the comment for queueFinish

EuphoricThinking · 2026-04-02T14:04:46Z

 }

 ur_result_t
 ur_queue_batched_t::queueFinishUnlocked(locked<batch_manager> &batchLocked) {


Firstly, we should check whether the graph capture is active and enqueue the graph if active.

I don't think that recorded graph should be enqueued when graph capture is active and queueFinish is called. There's a separate enqueueGraph function for enqueueing graphs, so for active graph capture queueFinish should probably be noop.

@kswiecicki It's what I've added, noop when graph capture is active.

Why should this be noop? I don't mean that it's bad, I just want to understand the reasoning behind this decision.
Maybe I don't understand what are the consequences of the active graph mode. Are operations immediately submitted then?

We can't synchronize the current queue with host, since the queue is in graph capture mode, and the graph wasn't finalized yet. Hence I think that this should either return some INVALID error or be a noop.

EuphoricThinking · 2026-04-06T15:26:39Z

  // Firstly, enqueue the current batch (a regular list), then enqueue the
  // command buffer batch (also a regular list) to preserve the order of
  // operations
  if (!lockedBatch->isActiveBatchEmpty()) {


Does it work with the current implementation and the graph capture being enabled?

KFilipek · 2026-04-13T10:37:45Z

Rebased

…ero v2 batched queue

During graph capture, commands are appended to an immediate command list instead of the regular batch.

Before beginning graph capture, enqueue the current batch (regular command list) to preserve operation order. This ensures the queue is empty before switching to immediate list mode for graph capture, similar to command buffer handling. Apply to both queueBeginGraphCapteExp and queueBeginCapteIntoGraphExp.

During graph capture, operations are recorded to the immediate command list. Synchronization and flushing operations don't apply to graph recording, so return early when graph capture is active. Also added a clarifying comment in queueIsGraphCapteEnabledExp about the returned command list.

This ensures consistency with other enqueue methods and provides proper context for event handling during graph capture.

This reverts commit e7c2d50.

KFilipek requested a review from a team as a code owner February 19, 2026 13:07

KFilipek marked this pull request as draft February 19, 2026 13:07

KFilipek had a problem deploying to WindowsCILock February 19, 2026 13:07 — with GitHub Actions Error

KFilipek self-assigned this Feb 19, 2026

KFilipek force-pushed the 07-graph_for_batched branch from 560edb4 to 7c9779b Compare February 19, 2026 13:12

KFilipek temporarily deployed to WindowsCILock February 19, 2026 13:13 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

KFilipek had a problem deploying to WindowsCILock February 19, 2026 13:34 — with GitHub Actions Failure

KFilipek temporarily deployed to WindowsCILock February 19, 2026 13:34 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

KFilipek temporarily deployed to WindowsCILock February 20, 2026 09:39 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

KFilipek force-pushed the 07-graph_for_batched branch from 09eaf7d to 2200aa5 Compare February 20, 2026 10:43

KFilipek had a problem deploying to WindowsCILock February 20, 2026 10:44 — with GitHub Actions Error

KFilipek force-pushed the 07-graph_for_batched branch from 2200aa5 to 3f6298f Compare February 20, 2026 10:53

KFilipek temporarily deployed to WindowsCILock February 20, 2026 10:55 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

KFilipek temporarily deployed to WindowsCILock February 20, 2026 11:20 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

KFilipek had a problem deploying to WindowsCILock February 20, 2026 11:20 — with GitHub Actions Failure

KFilipek temporarily deployed to WindowsCILock February 20, 2026 11:20 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

KFilipek had a problem deploying to WindowsCILock February 20, 2026 11:30 — with GitHub Actions Failure

kswiecicki requested changes Feb 20, 2026

View reviewed changes

KFilipek temporarily deployed to WindowsCILock February 23, 2026 09:10 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

KFilipek requested a review from EuphoricThinking February 23, 2026 09:41

EuphoricThinking requested changes Feb 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread unified-runtime/source/adapters/level_zero/v2/queue_batched.hpp Outdated

KFilipek had a problem deploying to WindowsCILock February 23, 2026 14:44 — with GitHub Actions Error

KFilipek force-pushed the 07-graph_for_batched branch from 1d21010 to 66e360e Compare February 23, 2026 14:47

KFilipek temporarily deployed to WindowsCILock February 23, 2026 14:48 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

KFilipek had a problem deploying to WindowsCILock February 23, 2026 15:09 — with GitHub Actions Failure

KFilipek temporarily deployed to WindowsCILock February 23, 2026 15:09 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

KFilipek force-pushed the 07-graph_for_batched branch from 44d0c9e to 77ae0d5 Compare February 27, 2026 12:12

EuphoricThinking requested changes Mar 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

KFilipek force-pushed the 07-graph_for_batched branch from 116ac26 to c975178 Compare March 27, 2026 13:32

EuphoricThinking requested changes Mar 30, 2026

View reviewed changes

KFilipek force-pushed the 07-graph_for_batched branch 3 times, most recently from 5bb0193 to 24efe33 Compare April 2, 2026 10:23

EuphoricThinking requested changes Apr 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

KFilipek force-pushed the 07-graph_for_batched branch from e59a819 to 3109250 Compare April 3, 2026 09:50

EuphoricThinking reviewed Apr 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

KFilipek force-pushed the 07-graph_for_batched branch 2 times, most recently from cb286b4 to 375088d Compare April 13, 2026 10:36

kswiecicki approved these changes Apr 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

KFilipek added 13 commits April 15, 2026 11:46

[UR][L0v2] Add support for graph capture and execution in the Level Z…

44f2700

…ero v2 batched queue

[UR][L0v2] Remove unused createEventAndRetainRegular()

2719490

[UR][L0v2] Extend graph capture test

e8c99ed

FIX

556e395

[UR][L0v2] Set graph capture state in begin/end graph capture methods

3617cbf

[UR][L0v2] Pass queue pointer to wait_list_view in enqueueGraphExp

4c7e106

[UR][L0v2] Add error handling for graph execution in enqueueGraphExp

0fb6978

[UR][L0v2] Skip batch marking during graph capture

438e6c5

During graph capture, commands are appended to an immediate command list instead of the regular batch.

Fix enquequeGraphExp

16a2c47

Remove obsolete enqueueKernelLaunch()

c96b7bf

[UR][L0v2] Pass queue pointer to wait_list_view in enqueueHostTaskExp

a1f61c9

This ensures consistency with other enqueue methods and provides proper context for event handling during graph capture.

KFilipek force-pushed the 07-graph_for_batched branch from 375088d to a1f61c9 Compare April 15, 2026 09:46

KFilipek added 2 commits April 15, 2026 15:32

Add checking buffer correctness.

e7c2d50

Revert "Add checking buffer correctness."

6a3c0a3

This reverts commit e7c2d50.

Conversation

KFilipek commented Feb 19, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

KFilipek commented Apr 13, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants