| Commit-Queue | +1 |
| Inspect html for hidden footers to help with email filtering. To unsubscribe visit settings. |
uint64_t vram_mb = 0;Placing this here is causing the optimization guide internal bots to fail. You can move it to the end to make them happy.
| Inspect html for hidden footers to help with email filtering. To unsubscribe visit settings. |
ml::GetDeviceAndPerformanceInfo(*chrome_ml_);It looks like this will trigger a benchmark to run, but all we need vram_mb?
ml::GetDeviceAndPerformanceInfo(*chrome_ml_);It looks like this will trigger a benchmark to run, but all we need vram_mb?
Currently our VRAM fetching is tied to our micro benchmark. Probably something that we should fix. Otherwise overriding the performance class blocks anything that depends on a VRAM check
| Inspect html for hidden footers to help with email filtering. To unsubscribe visit settings. |
ml::GetDeviceAndPerformanceInfo(*chrome_ml_);Chi Yo TsaiIt looks like this will trigger a benchmark to run, but all we need vram_mb?
Currently our VRAM fetching is tied to our micro benchmark. Probably something that we should fix. Otherwise overriding the performance class blocks anything that depends on a VRAM check
Could we pass in the already calculated vram from the browser process? It's saved in components/optimization_guide/core/model_execution/performance_class.cc to the local state preference model_execution::prefs::localstate::kOnDeviceVramMb. We could retrieve it from the `PerformanceClassifier` and pass it through the `LoadModelParams`.
Placing this here is causing the optimization guide internal bots to fail. You can move it to the end to make them happy.
Done
Chi Yo TsaiIt looks like this will trigger a benchmark to run, but all we need vram_mb?
Nathan MemmottCurrently our VRAM fetching is tied to our micro benchmark. Probably something that we should fix. Otherwise overriding the performance class blocks anything that depends on a VRAM check
Could we pass in the already calculated vram from the browser process? It's saved in components/optimization_guide/core/model_execution/performance_class.cc to the local state preference model_execution::prefs::localstate::kOnDeviceVramMb. We could retrieve it from the `PerformanceClassifier` and pass it through the `LoadModelParams`.
| Inspect html for hidden footers to help with email filtering. To unsubscribe visit settings. |
| Code-Review | +1 |
| Inspect html for hidden footers to help with email filtering. To unsubscribe visit settings. |
From googleclient/chrome/chromium_gwsq/ipc/config.gwsq:
IPC: dch...@chromium.org
📎 It looks like you’re making a possibly security-sensitive change! 📎 IPC security review isn’t a rubberstamp, so your friendly security reviewer will need a fair amount of context to review your CL effectively. Please review your CL description and code comments to make sure they provide context for someone unfamiliar with your project/area. Pay special attention to where data comes from and which processes it flows between (and their privilege levels). Feel free to point your security reviewer at design docs, bugs, or other links if you can’t reasonably make a self-contained CL description. (Also see https://cbea.ms/git-commit/).
IPC reviewer(s): dch...@chromium.org
Reviewer source(s):
dch...@chromium.org is from context(googleclient/chrome/chromium_gwsq/ipc/config.gwsq)
| Inspect html for hidden footers to help with email filtering. To unsubscribe visit settings. |
| Code-Review | +1 |
| Inspect html for hidden footers to help with email filtering. To unsubscribe visit settings. |