Skip to content

Conversation

@lancelly
Copy link
Collaborator

@lancelly lancelly commented Nov 21, 2025

The buffer tensor returned by get_buffer does not need to be initailized. The callers should initialize the returned buffer themseves if needed.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Refactor
    • Optimized memory buffer allocation efficiency without changes to the public API.

✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.

@lancelly lancelly requested a review from a team as a code owner November 21, 2025 09:42
@lancelly lancelly changed the title [https://nvbug/5629833] Use torch.empty instead of torch.zeros in get_buffer [https://nvbug/5629833][fix] Use torch.empty instead of torch.zeros in get_buffer Nov 21, 2025
@lancelly
Copy link
Collaborator Author

/bot run --disable-fail-fast

@lancelly lancelly changed the title [https://nvbug/5629833][fix] Use torch.empty instead of torch.zeros in get_buffer [https://nvbugs/5629833][fix] Use torch.empty instead of torch.zeros in get_buffer Nov 21, 2025
@coderabbitai
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Nov 21, 2025

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The memory_buffer_utils module was modified to use uninitialized cuda uint8 buffers instead of zero-initialized ones during allocation in the get_buffer method. An explanatory docstring was added to the method. No public API signatures were changed.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Summary
Buffer allocation optimization
tensorrt_llm/_torch/memory_buffer_utils.py
Replaced torch.zeros with torch.empty in both buffer allocation paths within get_buffer for uninitialized memory allocation. Added explanatory docstring to the method.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~8 minutes

  • Straightforward substitution pattern applied consistently across both allocation paths
  • Single-file change with localized scope
  • Requires verification that memory initialization behavior change is intentional and safe for all downstream usage

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
Check name Status Explanation Resolution
Description check ⚠️ Warning The description is minimal and lacks required sections from the template including detailed explanation of the issue, test coverage information, and PR checklist confirmation. Expand description to explain why this optimization is safe, add test coverage section, and complete the PR checklist items as specified in the template.
✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Title check ✅ Passed The title clearly and specifically describes the main change: replacing torch.zeros with torch.empty in the get_buffer function, referencing the NVBugs ticket.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed Docstring coverage is 100.00% which is sufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.
✨ Finishing touches
  • 📝 Generate docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between b6483ef and 9b211b2.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • tensorrt_llm/_torch/memory_buffer_utils.py (3 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (1)
  • GitHub Check: Pre-commit Check
🔇 Additional comments (2)
tensorrt_llm/_torch/memory_buffer_utils.py (2)

54-59: Good addition of explanatory docstring.

The docstring clearly documents that the returned buffer contains uninitialized memory and advises callers to overwrite the data before use. This is important documentation for preventing misuse.


100-102: ****

Tip

📝 Customizable high-level summaries are now available in beta!

You can now customize how CodeRabbit generates the high-level summary in your pull requests — including its content, structure, tone, and formatting.

  • Provide your own instructions using the high_level_summary_instructions setting.
  • Format the summary however you like (bullet lists, tables, multi-section layouts, contributor stats, etc.).
  • Use high_level_summary_in_walkthrough to move the summary from the description to the walkthrough section.

Example instruction:

"Divide the high-level summary into five sections:

  1. 📝 Description — Summarize the main change in 50–60 words, explaining what was done.
  2. 📓 References — List relevant issues, discussions, documentation, or related PRs.
  3. 📦 Dependencies & Requirements — Mention any new/updated dependencies, environment variable changes, or configuration updates.
  4. 📊 Contributor Summary — Include a Markdown table showing contributions:
    | Contributor | Lines Added | Lines Removed | Files Changed |
  5. ✔️ Additional Notes — Add any extra reviewer context.
    Keep each section concise (under 200 words) and use bullet or numbered lists for clarity."

Note: This feature is currently in beta for Pro-tier users, and pricing will be announced later.


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

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@tensorrt-cicd
Copy link
Collaborator

PR_Github #25352 [ run ] triggered by Bot. Commit: 9b211b2

@lancelly lancelly closed this Nov 21, 2025
@lancelly
Copy link
Collaborator Author

duplicated with:#9296

@tensorrt-cicd
Copy link
Collaborator

PR_Github #25352 [ run ] completed with state SUCCESS. Commit: 9b211b2
/LLM/main/L0_MergeRequest_PR pipeline #19176 completed with status: 'FAILURE'

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.

2 participants