Open
Conversation
Consolidates previous kernel_benchmark.py and pytorch_benchmark.py into a streamlined 3-file architecture with clear separation of concerns: Architecture: - benchmark.py (299 lines): Main Benchmark class with simplified API - benchmark_kernel(): Always uses subprocess for crash protection - benchmark_pytorch(): Always uses direct mode for stable code - BenchmarkLockManager: GPU lock management for multi-worker scenarios - timing.py (437 lines): Complete timing infrastructure - Timing: time_with_cuda_events(), time_with_triton_do_bench() - Loading: prepare_pytorch_model(), load_kernel_function() - Stats: compute_timing_stats() with essential metrics (mean/std/min/max) - kernel_subprocess.py (442 lines): Subprocess runner for kernel isolation - Crash protection for potentially buggy kernels - Clean CUDA state between runs - Timeout handling Key improvements: - Eliminated string code generation (was generating Python as strings) - Removed unnecessary statistics (median, p25/p75/p95/p99) - Removed confusing use_subprocess parameter (behavior now deterministic) - Fixed dtype bug causing incorrect speedup measurements - Reduced from 5 files to 3 files with clearer naming - Code reduction: ~1,400 lines → 1,178 lines Simple API: bench = Benchmark(logger, temp_dir, lock, worker_id) pytorch_result = bench.benchmark_pytorch(problem_file) kernel_result = bench.benchmark_kernel(kernel_file, problem_file) speedup = pytorch_result['stats']['mean'] / kernel_result['time_ms']
added 8 commits
January 30, 2026 14:26
meta-cla
bot
added
the
CLA Signed
kaiming-cheng
force-pushed
the
kaiming/worker_clean
branch
from
05c9055 to
6c2ccc1
Compare
Jack-Khuu
requested changes
Feb 6, 2026
Contributor
Jack-Khuu
left a comment
Jack-Khuu
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I assume worker/worker_util are the only unique changes, lmk if that's not true
Can you check that the changes to worker_util aren't duplicates of existing functions? I'm down to move them in a different PT if it's the same, but let's keep the line changes minimal for this PR
| # ------------------------ | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| def _call_llm( |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Don't we already have somthing like this in the worker?
| # ------------------------ | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| def _extract_code_from_response( |
|
|
||
| return success, stdout, stderr, None | ||
|
|
||
| def verify_with_refinement( |
msaroufim
approved these changes
Feb 14, 2026
Member
msaroufim
left a comment
msaroufim
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Stamping for blog, i did not review
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary:
verify_with_refinement()method for simpler single-shot verification with refinement loopworker
Test
Result