-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.6k
SiStripClusterizer, an Alpaka port of the CUDA ClustersFromRawProducerGPU [16_0_X] #49800
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
SiStripClusterizer, an Alpaka port of the CUDA ClustersFromRawProducerGPU [16_0_X] #49800
Conversation
Co-authored-by: Andrea Bocci <[email protected]>
- Kernels work divider of 256u from optimization (cms-sw#47629 (comment)) - Bug fix for events with `nStrips` = 0 (https://gist.github.com/mmusich/a7928a000b4eb6ea00ac5ab9cfa2238e) -- Fix for packet code of non-lite ZS buffers (https://gist.github.com/mmusich/a7928a000b4eb6ea00ac5ab9cfa2238e) - Use Acc1D directly (cms-sw#47629 (comment)) - Fix errors in static analysis (cms-sw#47629 (comment)) Co-authored-by: Andrea Bocci <[email protected]>
|
A new Pull Request was created by @pietroGru for CMSSW_16_0_X. It involves the following packages:
@Moanwar, @cmsbuild, @fwyzard, @jfernan2, @makortel, @mandrenguyen, @srimanob can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
|
cms-bot internal usage |
|
enable gpu |
|
please test |
|
+heterogeneous |
|
backport of #47629 |
|
+1 Size: This PR adds an extra 20KB to repository Comparison SummarySummary:
AMD_MI300X Comparison SummarySummary:
AMD_W7900 Comparison SummarySummary:
NVIDIA_H100 Comparison SummarySummary:
NVIDIA_L40S Comparison SummarySummary:
NVIDIA_T4 Comparison SummarySummary:
|
|
+1 |
|
This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_16_0_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_16_1_X is complete. This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @ftenchini, @sextonkennedy, @mandrenguyen (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
|
+1 |
PR description:
Backport of #47629. Summary of the original description
Further informations in #47629 and comments.
PR validation:
None beyond #47629.
If this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR. If this PR will be backported please specify to which release cycle the backport is meant for:
Backport of #47629, rebased on top of the
CMSSW_16_0_Xbranch.