Fix multiple warning classes #2058
Draft
+140
−79
Conversation
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
…e that was not properly error-handling in forked regions.
…. `ncclComm` is allocated using `malloc` and `memset` to 0, so using `unique_ptr` was never valid. Addresses warnings about non-standard-layout and use of `offsetof`.
… signature used in all_gather, and explicitly forward params to the proper ctor. This removes the warning and any ambiguity around the implicit overloading of `p2pWork` and `stepSize_`.
corey-derochie-amd
force-pushed
the
fix-warnings
branch
from
662fbdc to
d80c369
Compare
1 task
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
TBD
Details
Do not mention proprietary info or link to internal work items in this PR.
Work item: "Internal", or link to GitHub issue (if applicable).
What were the changes?
One sentence describing the work done.
Why were the changes made?
Explain the motivation behind the work. Provide any publicly-available historical context.
How was the outcome achieved?
Technical details behind the work. Explain any publicly-available hardware peculiarities.
Additional Documentation:
What else should the reviewer know?
Approval Checklist
Do not approve until these items are satisfied.