Skip to content

Conversation

@jan-janssen
Copy link
Member

@jan-janssen jan-janssen commented Jul 28, 2025

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Documentation

    • Improved and clarified documentation for resource configuration parameters across multiple components, providing detailed descriptions of expected keys, types, and purposes.
    • Updated terminology for consistency (e.g., gpus_per_worker to gpus_per_core, oversubscribe to openmpi_oversubscribe).
    • Added explanations for new resource dictionary keys such as slurm_cmd_args and error_log_file.
  • Refactor

    • Renamed a constructor parameter for consistency (oversubscribe to openmpi_oversubscribe) in one component.

@coderabbitai
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jul 28, 2025

Walkthrough

This update standardizes and enhances the documentation for the resource_dict parameter in several executor and scheduler components, clarifying expected keys, types, and their purposes. Additionally, a parameter in the SubprocessSpawner constructor is renamed for consistency. No logic or control flow changes are introduced.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Change Summary
Docstring Enhancements: resource_dict
executorlib/executor/base.py, executorlib/task_scheduler/base.py, executorlib/task_scheduler/interactive/blockallocation.py, executorlib/standalone/serialize.py
Updated the resource_dict parameter docstrings to provide detailed, structured descriptions of expected keys, types, and default values. Clarified and standardized terminology (e.g., gpus_per_core, openmpi_oversubscribe, slurm_cmd_args, error_log_file). No changes to logic or function signatures.
Parameter Rename: Spawner Consistency
executorlib/standalone/interactive/spawner.py
Renamed the constructor parameter from oversubscribe to openmpi_oversubscribe in SubprocessSpawner to align with the naming convention used in the base class. Updated documentation and superclass constructor call accordingly. No changes to logic or control flow.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes

Possibly related PRs

Poem

In burrows deep, with docs anew,
The rabbits tidy what users view.
With keys and types now crystal clear,
Resource requests bring no more fear.
A tweak, a fix, a naming delight—
Our code hops forward, ever bright! 🐇✨

✨ Finishing Touches
  • 📝 Generate Docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment
  • Commit unit tests in branch docstring_updates

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Explain this complex logic.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai explain this code block.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and explain its main purpose.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Support

Need help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate sequence diagram to generate a sequence diagram of the changes in this PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate unit tests to generate unit tests for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 1

🔭 Outside diff range comments (1)
executorlib/standalone/interactive/spawner.py (1)

63-77: Renaming oversubscribe silently breaks external callers – provide a compatibility shim

openmpi_oversubscribe is a clearer name, but removing the old oversubscribe parameter is a breaking change for anyone instantiating SubprocessSpawner directly or passing the key through factory code.

Add a backwards-compatibility alias that raises a DeprecationWarning for one release cycle.

 def __init__(
     self,
     cwd: Optional[str] = None,
     cores: int = 1,
-    openmpi_oversubscribe: bool = False,
+    openmpi_oversubscribe: bool = False,
     threads_per_core: int = 1,
+    # Deprecated – keep until vX.Y
+    oversubscribe: Optional[bool] = None,
 ):
@@
-        super().__init__(
-            cwd=cwd,
-            cores=cores,
-            openmpi_oversubscribe=openmpi_oversubscribe,
-        )
+        if oversubscribe is not None:
+            import warnings
+            warnings.warn(
+                "`oversubscribe` is deprecated; use `openmpi_oversubscribe`",
+                DeprecationWarning,
+                stacklevel=2,
+            )
+            openmpi_oversubscribe = oversubscribe
+
+        super().__init__(cwd=cwd, cores=cores, openmpi_oversubscribe=openmpi_oversubscribe)

This prevents hard runtime failures while still nudging users toward the new name.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 3b8627c and f9b4da7.

📒 Files selected for processing (5)
  • executorlib/executor/base.py (1 hunks)
  • executorlib/standalone/interactive/spawner.py (1 hunks)
  • executorlib/standalone/serialize.py (1 hunks)
  • executorlib/task_scheduler/base.py (1 hunks)
  • executorlib/task_scheduler/interactive/blockallocation.py (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
executorlib/executor/base.py (1)

71-80: Docstring enrichment aligns with resource_dict spec – looks good

The expanded description is clear and consistent with the other modules.

executorlib/standalone/serialize.py (1)

45-54: Docstring update is clear and consistent

The new key list mirrors the executor and task-scheduler docs, removing ambiguity about GPU and oversubscribe semantics.

executorlib/task_scheduler/interactive/blockallocation.py (1)

116-125: Docstring harmonisation acknowledged

The parameter list now matches the rest of the codebase – no further action needed.

Comment on lines +90 to +99
resource_dict (dict): A dictionary of resources required by the task. With the following keys:
- cores (int): number of MPI cores to be used for each function call
- threads_per_core (int): number of OpenMP threads to be used for each function call
- gpus_per_core (int): number of GPUs per worker - defaults to 0
- cwd (str/None): current working directory where the parallel python task is executed
- openmpi_oversubscribe (bool): adds the `--oversubscribe` command line flag (OpenMPI and
SLURM only) - default False
- slurm_cmd_args (list): Additional command line arguments for the srun call (SLURM only)
- error_log_file (str): Name of the error log file to use for storing exceptions raised
by the Python functions submitted to the Executor.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Verification agent

🧩 Analysis chain

Ensure check_resource_dict recognises gpus_per_core

The docstring now documents gpus_per_core, but executorlib.standalone.inputcheck.check_resource_dict historically expected gpus_per_worker. Verify the helper was updated accordingly to avoid false validation errors.


🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for gpus_per_worker vs gpus_per_core in the input-check helper
fd inputcheck | xargs rg -n 'gpus_per_(worker|core)'

Length of output: 754


Update inputcheck to support gpus_per_core

The executorlib.standalone.inputcheck module still defines and tests:

  • check_gpus_per_worker(gpus_per_worker: int)
    File: executorlib/standalone/inputcheck.py (lines 30–38)
  • Calls in tests: tests/test_standalone_inputcheck.py (lines 5, 31–33)

These must be renamed to check_gpus_per_core(gpus_per_core: int) (and all related call sites in check_resource_dict) to match the updated docstring in executorlib/task_scheduler/base.py and avoid validation errors.

Tagging as

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
In executorlib/standalone/inputcheck.py around lines 30 to 38 and
tests/test_standalone_inputcheck.py around lines 5 and 31 to 33, rename the
function check_gpus_per_worker to check_gpus_per_core and update all related
call sites in the check_resource_dict function accordingly. This change aligns
the validation function and its usage with the updated resource_dict key
gpus_per_core in executorlib/task_scheduler/base.py, preventing validation
errors.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 28, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 97.47%. Comparing base (3b8627c) to head (f9b4da7).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #764   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   97.47%   97.47%           
=======================================
  Files          32       32           
  Lines        1423     1423           
=======================================
  Hits         1387     1387           
  Misses         36       36           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@jan-janssen jan-janssen merged commit 4adfb3d into main Jul 28, 2025
53 of 55 checks passed
@jan-janssen jan-janssen deleted the docstring_updates branch July 28, 2025 07:06
@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot mentioned this pull request Sep 7, 2025
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.

1 participant