refact(comments): state the mechanism, not the incident
Every comment that invoked a 'law' (50 word-boundary sites across 28 tracked files) now states what is going on and why, in terms that transfer to any project: gate twins drift until one side greenlights what the other refuses; a tag re-points while a digest pins; a restrictive engine behavior belongs to the runtime that imposed it and must be re-tested, not inherited; a speculative head is tensors in the file, not a flag; snapshot links dangle where the container resolves them; exit 0 is a clean stop to systemd, so a self-exiting daemon on on-failure goes dark reporting success. Event narratives and dates are gone from these comments; the mechanics carry the argument. Behavior-identical: bash -n, py_compile, yaml parse, full bats suite 408/408 green. One symbol rename rides along (stack script local scale_law -> scale_contract, with its log text).
This commit is contained in:
1 parent
65bd5ccea7
commit
d4ce76b68b
28 files changed
+195
-164
No files matched your search
@@ -293,12 +293,12 @@ def main():
|
||||
ddt, dsh = meta[f"{pre0}.mlp.experts.0.down_proj.weight"][3:5]
|
||||
gsd, gssh = meta[f"{pre0}.mlp.experts.0.gate_proj.weight_scale_inv"][3:5]
|
||||
dsd, dssh = meta[f"{pre0}.mlp.experts.0.down_proj.weight_scale_inv"][3:5]
|
||||
scale_law = (gdt == F8 and ddt == F8 and gsd == BF16 and dsd == BF16
|
||||
scale_contract = (gdt == F8 and ddt == F8 and gsd == BF16 and dsd == BF16
|
||||
and list(gssh) == [(gsh[0] + 127) // 128, (gsh[1] + 127) // 128]
|
||||
and list(dssh) == [(dsh[0] + 127) // 128, (dsh[1] + 127) // 128])
|
||||
if not scale_law:
|
||||
if not scale_contract:
|
||||
log(f"ERROR: unexpected expert shapes: gate {gdt}{gsh} scale {gsd}{gssh} "
|
||||
f"down {ddt}{dsh} scale {dsd}{dssh} (scale law 128x128)")
|
||||
f"down {ddt}{dsh} scale {dsd}{dssh} (fp8 block scales cover 128x128 tiles)")
|
||||
return 2
|
||||
shapes = {"ffn2_h": (gsh[0] * 2, gsh[1]), "ffn": (dsh[1],),
|
||||
"gs": tuple(gssh), "ds": tuple(dssh)}
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in new issue
Block a user