unittest: fix deepgemm sha256

[yzh119]

📌 Description

Deepgemm unittest failed because of out-dated sha256, this PR fixes the issue.

🔍 Related Issues

🚀 Pull Request Checklist

Thank you for contributing to FlashInfer! Before we review your pull request, please make sure the following items are complete.

✅ Pre-commit Checks

• I have installed pre-commit by running pip install pre-commit (or used your preferred method).
• I have installed the hooks with pre-commit install.
• I have run the hooks manually with pre-commit run --all-files and fixed any reported issues.

If you are unsure about how to set up pre-commit, see the pre-commit documentation.

🧪 Tests

• Tests have been added or updated as needed.
• All tests are passing (unittest, etc.).

Reviewer Notes

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Chores
  • Updated internal artifact version information to support latest optimizations and improvements.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @yzh119, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request addresses a critical issue where unit tests for the deepgemm component were failing due to an incorrect SHA256 hash. By updating the hash to its current valid value, the PR ensures the integrity checks pass, allowing the deepgemm functionality to be properly verified and integrated.

Highlights

• Unit Test Fix: Resolved a failing unit test for deepgemm by updating an outdated SHA256 hash.
• SHA256 Update: The DEEPGEMM constant's SHA256 hash in flashinfer/artifacts.py has been updated to its correct value.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[coderabbitai]

Note

Other AI code review bot(s) detected

CodeRabbit has detected other AI code review bot(s) in this pull request and will avoid duplicating their findings in the review comments. This may lead to a less comprehensive review.

Walkthrough

The pull request updates a single constant hash value in the artifacts module. The MetaInfoHash.DEEPGEMM field is modified from one hash digest to another, likely reflecting a change in the referenced artifact or build output.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Artifact hash update flashinfer/artifacts.py	Updated MetaInfoHash.DEEPGEMM constant from "b4374f857c3066089c4ec6b5e79e785559fa2c05ce2623710b0b04bf86414a48" to "f161e031826adb8c4f0d31ddbd2ed77e4909e4e43cdfc9728918162a62fcccfb"

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes

Poem

🐰 One hash replaced with care,
A single line, a new affair,
DEEPGEMM's treasure, old to new,
The rabbit hops—there's work to do! ✨

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title Check	✅ Passed	The PR title "unittest: fix deepgemm sha256" directly relates to the main change in the pull request, which updates an outdated sha256 hash value for MetaInfoHash.DEEPGEMM to fix a failing unittest. The title is concise, specific, and clearly indicates the purpose of the change without noise or vague terminology. A teammate reviewing the git history would immediately understand that this fixes a deepgemm test verification issue.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changes. Docstring coverage check skipped.
Description Check	✅ Passed	The PR description is mostly complete and follows the repository's template structure. The critical Description section is filled out with a clear, specific explanation that the PR fixes a failing Deepgemm unittest by updating an outdated sha256 value, which aligns with the actual code changes. While the "Related Issues" section is empty and some test checklist items remain unchecked, these are non-critical elements. The template structure is present and the author has completed the pre-commit checklist section appropriately.

✨ Finishing touches

• 📝 Generate docstrings

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment

---

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

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request updates the SHA256 hash for the DEEPGEMM artifact, which is intended to fix a failing unit test due to an outdated hash. While updating the hash in MetaInfoHash is correct, I've identified a potential related issue. It's common for the checksums.txt file to also be updated when an artifact changes, which would require updating its corresponding hash in CheckSumHash. I've left a specific comment detailing this potential omission, which could lead to runtime failures.

[gemini-code-assist]

This change updates the hash for MetaInfoHash.DEEPGEMM, which corresponds to the kernel_map.json file. When deep-gemm artifacts are updated, it is likely that checksums.txt is also modified, which would change its hash. The hash for checksums.txt is stored in CheckSumHash.DEEPGEMM on line 115. If this hash is not also updated, it will cause a RuntimeError due to a checksum mismatch during artifact download and verification. It appears this related hash has not been updated in this pull request.

[bkryu]

I don't think this comment applies if this is the only hash that was missed and is therefore being corrected.

[nvmbreughe]

LGTM. Gemini was suggesting to take a look at checksums.txt. Not sure if it applies.

[bkryu]

LGTM. Did not validate the hash myself, but should work if it passes unit tests