Skip to content
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

Move SystemMonitor's GPU initialization back to constructor #4866

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Jun 3, 2021

Conversation

pentschev
Copy link
Member

@pentschev pentschev commented Jun 1, 2021

@pentschev
Copy link
Member Author

cc @charlesbluca @quasiben

Copy link
Member

@charlesbluca charlesbluca left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for doing this @pentschev 😄

cuda_visible_devices = list(range(count))
gpu_idx = cuda_visible_devices[0]
return pynvml.nvmlDeviceGetHandleByIndex(gpu_idx)
return pynvml.nvmlDeviceGetHandleByIndex(0)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nitpicky but at this point could we just call pynvml.nvmlDeviceGetHandleByIndex(0) in the places where we used to call nvml._pynvml_handles()?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done in ddf9a43

@@ -92,10 +93,6 @@ def update(self):

# give external modules (like dask-cuda) a chance to initialize CUDA context
if nvml is not None and nvml.nvmlInit is not None:
Copy link
Member

@charlesbluca charlesbluca Jun 1, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think the nvml.nvmlInit check here is redundant now, though it shouldn't cause any problems to leave it.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's not redundant, this is what I mentioned earlier when I also thought it was. It refers to the object in

and not to the pynvml.nvmlInit method. I think that's a confusing naming choice nevertheless but I won't touch it right now.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I agree with that; I'm referring to the fact that by the time we call update(), we will have also called nvml.one_time(), meaning that nvml.nvmlInit will always not be None if nvml is not None.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ah sorry, you're right, good catch. I've updated that in 79b315b .

Copy link
Member

@jrbourbeau jrbourbeau left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks @pentschev! Is there a regression test we should add here or in dask-cuda?

@pentschev
Copy link
Member Author

@jrbourbeau since it requires PyNVML and a GPU, unfortunately we can't test it in Distributed right now, but @charlesbluca is working on testing that in Dask-CUDA in rapidsai/dask-cuda#635 .

@quasiben
Copy link
Member

quasiben commented Jun 2, 2021

I think there is an issue here still. The changes around pynvml.nvmlDeviceGetHandleByIndex i think, need to be reverted. In #3810 we saw that pynvml doesn't respect CUDA_VISIBLE_DEVICES so we get in correct reporting. Here's a small reproducer of the issue:

In [1]: from dask.distributed import Client, fire_and_forget, wait
   ...: from dask_cuda import LocalCUDACluster
   ...: from dask.utils import parse_bytes
   ...: import dask

In [2]: cluster = LocalCUDACluster()

In [3]: client = Client(cluster)

In [4]: import rmm

In [5]: rmm.reinitialize(pool_allocator=1e9) # create data on the client/GPU 0

In [6]: for w in cluster.scheduler.workers:
    ...:     print(cluster.scheduler.workers[w].metrics['gpu_memory_used'])
17728536576
17728536576
17728536576
17728536576
17728536576
17728536576
17728536576
17728536576
17728536576
17728536576
17728536576
17728536576
17728536576
17728536576
17728536576
17728536576

In the above, we should only see one GPU with a large allocation

@jrbourbeau
Copy link
Member

Thanks for pointing me to rapidsai/dask-cuda#635 @pentschev -- that's what I was looking for. I knew dask-cuda ran some subset of the distributed tests, I just wanted to make sure something for this issue was included which it looks like rapidsai/dask-cuda#635 is handling

@pentschev
Copy link
Member Author

I think there is an issue here still. The changes around pynvml.nvmlDeviceGetHandleByIndex i think, need to be reverted.

You're right. I've reverted the changes now. However, this breaks https://github.com/rapidsai/dask-cuda/blob/81bbc6f85575826b13b3fb45894b54135514e668/dask_cuda/tests/test_dask_cuda_worker.py#L21-L59 , which is a test that ensures we can verify CUDA_VISIBLE_DEVICES behavior even on a single-GPU setup (e.g., gpuCI), but fails because we now try to address a GPU index beyond the existing ones. I'm still trying to think of a way to fix that.

@pentschev
Copy link
Member Author

Alright, this will break the test I mentioned above but there's not much we can do right now to prevent it without adding considerable complexity to Distributed or Dask-CUDA. I say we should merge this as is and then xfail those tests in Dask-CUDA for now, and I'll file an issue to figure out a solution later.

@jrbourbeau
Copy link
Member

cc @quasiben

@quasiben
Copy link
Member

quasiben commented Jun 3, 2021

Thanks @pentschev . I'm good with merging in as well and I'll help (as best I can) with the failing dask-cuda test

@pentschev
Copy link
Member Author

I'm ok with that. The failed test doesn't seem to be related, so it's good to merge from my side.

@quasiben
Copy link
Member

quasiben commented Jun 3, 2021

Thanks again @pentschev !

@quasiben quasiben merged commit 1754b48 into dask:main Jun 3, 2021
@pentschev
Copy link
Member Author

Thanks everyone for reviews!

douglasdavis pushed a commit to douglasdavis/distributed that referenced this pull request Jun 8, 2021
* Always use index 0 to get NVML GPU handle

* Move SystemMonitor's GPU initialization back to constructor

* Use nvmlDeviceGetHandleByIndex directly

* Remove redundant nvmlInit check

* Revert "Use nvmlDeviceGetHandleByIndex directly"

This reverts commit ddf9a43.

* Revert "Always use index 0 to get NVML GPU handle"

This reverts commit d860e58.
rapids-bot bot pushed a commit to rapidsai/dask-cuda that referenced this pull request Jun 8, 2021
After recent changes in Distributed, particularly dask/distributed#4866, worker processes will now attempt to get information from PyNVML based on the index specified in `CUDA_VISIBLE_DEVICES`. Some of our tests purposely test device numbers that may not exist in some systems (e.g., gpuCI where only single-GPU is supported) to ensure the `CUDA_VISIBLE_DEVICES` of each worker indeed respects the ordering of `dask_cuda.utils.cuda_visible_devices`. The changes here introduce a new `MockWorker` class that will monkey-patch the behavior of NVML usage of `distributed.Worker`, which can then be used to return those tests to a working state.

Authors:
  - Peter Andreas Entschev (https://github.com/pentschev)

Approvers:
  - Benjamin Zaitlen (https://github.com/quasiben)

URL: #638
@pentschev pentschev deleted the fix-nvml-system-monitor branch June 30, 2021 12:23
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.

4 participants