The batch/ubatch sweep (scripts/bench-batch-ubatch.sh, 23 cells of a 28-cell grid, 3 reps each) says the ubatch knob has an OPTIMUM, not a plateau: ubatch 256 384 512 768 1024 1280 1536 1792 2048 tok/s 1046 1068 1193 1135 1152 1151 1165 1148 1078 The curve is remarkably reproducible -- 512 came out 1192.88 / 1193.23 / 1193.28 / 1193.88 across batch 2048, 4096, 6144 and 8192, and 2048 came out 1077.38 / 1077.54 / 1077.59 -- so this is a deterministic property of the shape, not noise. The logical batch is throughput-neutral (2048..8192 all within 2 % at a fixed ubatch) and VRAM-neutral (the compute buffers are sized by ubatch alone). Decode is 15.88 tok/s at depth 65536 on every single cell. So the deployed 6144x1536 was both 2.4 % slower than the optimum and 3.71 GiB more expensive. Measured at the deployed shape (262144, 2 slots, DFlash2): 36,29 ubatch 1536 -> 4.71 / 4.91 GiB free (what was deployed) 36,29 ubatch 512 -> 6.01 / 7.32 GiB free (ubatch alone) 35,30 ubatch 512 -> 6.44 / 6.90 GiB free <- deployed The ubatch move freed 1.30 GiB on ROCm0 but 2.41 GiB on ROCm1, because ROCm1 holds the output layers and the drafter's graphs -- so it shifted the balance toward ROCm1 by 1.31 GiB and the split had to follow it one layer. 0.46 GiB is one DeltaNet layer's worth of asymmetry, i.e. the granularity floor: no split can be tuned finer than a layer, which is why 34,31 is not better. Re-fitted the seam with both ubatch coefficients measured at this shape and re-anchored it on the new deployed point (it reproduces 6.44 / 6.90 to 0.01 GiB). Every neighbouring split still fails it: 36,29 -> 1.85, 34,31 -> 0.94, 37,28 -> 3.24, 1,1 -> 3.03, 39,26 -> 6.03 GiB. Also replaced the unit test's literal `TENSOR_SPLIT=36,29` assertion with the shape it actually cares about -- two shares that add up to the model's 65 blocks, with ROCm1 taking the fewer -- so re-measuring the balance no longer breaks a test about parallelism. The numeric contract lives in the seam test.
12 KiB
type, title, description, tags, timestamp
| type | title | description | tags | timestamp | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| research | Dual R9700 Cooperation | Why frank-medium's two Radeon AI PRO R9700s run as independent replicas instead of tensor-parallel, which options are ruled out with evidence, and the two hardware paths that restore true TP=2. |
|
2026-09-16 |
Dual R9700 Cooperation
Dankserver's frank-medium runs as two independent single-GPU replicas
(:7771 on card #1, :7772 on card #2) behind an adaptive-routing proxy on
:7770. This page answers why, and what would let the two cards work on one
model instead. See frank-medium-radiance-mxfp4 for the deployment itself.
The short answer
Card #2 sits behind the B650 chipset, whose bridges cannot route PCIe atomic operations. RCCL's kernels carry a hidden hostcall-buffer parameter, and ROCr refuses to supply it to a device without atomics — so no RCCL collective or P2P operation can be dispatched on card #2. Two paths restore cooperation:
- Move card #2 to the free, CPU-attached M.2_2 slot (~$30 M.2→PCIe x4 riser). Cheapest, and bandwidth is not a constraint (below).
- A board whose CPU x16 bifurcates to x8/x8 (X670E/X870E class, ~$250-400). Best performance. This board has no x8/x8 mode.
The M.2_2 half of path 1 rests on a vendor claim, not on this host: ASUS
lists M.2_1 and M.2_2 as CPU-connected (PCIe 5.0 x4 and 4.0 x4) and M.2_3 as
chipset, while an empty slot does not enumerate — so nothing on a running
system can confirm it until a card is in it. And CPU-attached does not imply
Routing+: 00:08.3 is CPU-side and reads Routing-. The precedent worth
trusting is 00:01.2, the CPU M.2_1 port, which is Routing+. Note too what
the riser buys: tensor parallelism (~40 % decode), not "both cards on one
model" — the layer split already delivers that, so this is a performance
project, not a capability one.
The gate, in source
void Device::checkAtomicSupport() { // rocclr/device/rocm/rocdevice.cpp:181
std::vector<amd::Device::LinkAttrType> link_attrs;
link_attrs.push_back(std::make_pair(LinkAttribute::kLinkAtomicSupport, 0));
if (findLinkInfo(cpu_agent_info_->fine_grain_pool, &link_attrs)) {
if (link_attrs[0].second == 1) {
info_.pcie_atomics_ = true; // no else branch
}
}
}
The flag is a queried hardware property, consumed at
rocvirtual.cpp:3954 (the hostcall/AQL dispatch path), in rocblit.cpp (SDMA
copy paths) and exported as hipDeviceProp.hostNativeAtomicSupported. There is
no environment variable, module parameter, or sysfs toggle around it — verified
by grepping ROCclr for getenv/HSA_*/ROCR_*/AMD_* in the gate's
neighborhood: none. Writing the endpoint's Device Control 2 bit 6 by hand
(setpci -s 0b:00.0 CAP_EXP+28.w=0440) does nothing because the value is
consumed at driver probe time.
What has to be true upstream of it: every PCIe bridge on the GPU's path to the
CPU must advertise AtomicOpsCap: Routing+. On this board card #2's path
includes 05:00.0 and 06:09.0, both Routing- — a read-only capability
bit, so no software can enable it.
The same gate, as this board reports it (2026-09-16)
lspci -vv on dankserver. Card 0's chain is root port 00:01.1 → 01:00.0 →
02:00.0 → 03:00.0; card 1's is 00:02.1 → 05:00.0 → 06:00.0 →
06:09.0 → 09:00.0 → 0a:00.0 → 0b:00.0:
| Device | Role | AtomicOpsCap |
AtomicOpsCtl |
Link |
|---|---|---|---|---|
00:01.1 |
CPU root port → PCIEX16_1 | Routing+ | — | x16 |
03:00.0 |
card 0 | 32bit+ 64bit+ | ReqEn+ | x16 |
00:02.1 |
CPU root port → chipset | Routing+ | — | x4 |
05:00.0, 06:00.0, 06:09.0 |
B650 bridges | Routing− | — | x1 at 06:09.0 |
09:00.0, 0a:00.0 |
PCIe switch ports | Routing+ | — | x1 (downgraded) |
0b:00.0 |
card 1 | 32bit+ 64bit+ | ReqEn− | x16 |
Three things fall out of that table, none of them in the source alone:
- The CPU side is fine —
00:02.1isRouting+. The wall is inside the chipset, not the platform, which is why a slot on CPU lanes is the fix. - The endpoint's own bit differs between the cards, and that is the kernel's
doing.
pci_enable_atomic_ops_to_root()walks the bridge chain and refuses to set Requester Enable when any bridge cannot route atomics. ROCclr'spcie_atomics_and the endpoint'sReqEnare two faces of one cause, and it makeslspci -vv -s <bdf> | grep AtomicOpsCtla one-command diagnosis: on this host card 0 readsReqEn+and card 1ReqEn−. - Card 1's effective link is x1, not the x16 its own capability block
advertises:
06:09.0trained at x1, so ~2 GB/s is the real ceiling. That is a bandwidth fact rather than an atomics one, and it only matters for collectives — a 27B TP=2 allreduce is ≈5.6 ms/token at x1 against ≈1.4 ms at x4. The layer split's boundary copy does not care.
Measured matrix
Bare 2-rank torch.distributed (backend=nccl) on the two R9700s, no vLLM, no
model. Rank 0 = card #1 (CPU lanes), rank 1 = card #2 (chipset):
| Operation | rank 0 (card #1) | rank 1 (card #2) |
|---|---|---|
broadcast |
OK | FAIL DistBackendError |
all_reduce |
OK | FAIL |
barrier |
OK | FAIL |
send / recv (P2P) |
blocked, then timeout | FAIL |
all_gather (after failure) |
group unusable | — |
The AMD_LOG_LEVEL=3 trace names the cause: Pcie atomics not enabled, hostcall not supported → AQL dispatch failed! → hipLaunchKernel returns
hipErrorIllegalState for ncclDevKernel_Generic_4(...). Nothing in vLLM or
RCCL mentions atomics; the runtime log is the only place it appears.
send/recv failing is the decisive result: it kills pipeline parallelism
as an option, because vLLM's PP stage handoff is exactly that primitive.
Software escapes: closed, and one still open
| Idea | Finding |
|---|---|
| vLLM's IPC custom allreduce | Gated off by a table keyed to CUDA sm versions — {9.0, 10.0, 10.3, 10.7}; ROCm reports capability 12.0 for gfx1201, so the gate is False. custom_ar itself is compiled into the image. |
| ...and if that table were patched | Still insufficient: broadcast, barrier, and the TP logits all_gather have no non-RCCL path. |
| The radiance fork's own allreduce | Already present and on by default (RADIANCE_USE_R4D_AR, size gate RADIANCE_AR_MAX_KB): a one-shot P2P push allreduce wrapping CudaCommunicator.all_reduce, exchanging IPC handles over the gloo group. With the gate raised it covers prefill and decode, and ncclDevKernel disappears from the profile. But it does not intercept PyNcclCommunicator.__init__'s warmup allreduce, nor pynccl_comm.all_gather — both direct RCCL calls. |
| NCCL symmetric memory | Unavailable: the shipped RCCL advertises NCCL 2.30.4 but exposes no ncclDevComm* API, so torch's symmetric-memory path cannot run. |
| Prefill/decode disaggregation | Needs a KV-transfer connector plus coordination collectives; both out. |
| gloo for GPU work | CPU/TCP collectives — orders of magnitude too slow for per-layer TP. |
| Rebuild RCCL so its kernels do not declare a hostcall buffer | OPEN — unverified. The claim is that the hostcall requirement is triggered by device-side printf/assert, and that -mprintf-kind=buffered avoids it. Counter-evidence: RCCL's device source at src/device/ contains no live printf, assert, or __assertfail (checked), so what makes its kernels declare HiddenHostcallBuffer is unexplained. The claim traces to search-result summaries, not a primary source. Cheap to settle once a host is available: recompile librccl with -mprintf-kind=buffered, dump a kernel's declared arguments (roc-obj-extract + llvm-readelf --notes) and look for hidden_hostcall_buffer; if it is gone, a 2-rank probe should dispatch. Stop and mask the service first — see the note below. |
Bandwidth: why x4 is enough
A 27B TP=2 allreduce at batch 4 moves roughly
2 \times \text{batch} \times \text{hidden} \times 2\ \text{bytes} \approx 160\ \text{KB}
per layer per forward pass; across ~62 layers that is ≈10 MB per token-step,
or ~1.4 ms at PCIe 4.0 x4 (~7.9 GB/s). TP is compute-bound here, not
interconnect-bound. That is the whole reason the M.2 riser is the interesting
option rather than the board swap.
Ruled out empirically (do not re-derive)
- Kernel versions 7.0.0-28 / -30 / -31 — byte-identical failure.
iommu=pt, andamd_iommu=offis unrelated (that was a Dankclaw prefill knob).- P2P hardware: 45.274 GB/s bidirectional between the cards works fine — plain memory traffic is not the problem; atomic routing is.
- A from-source librccl rebuild: identical failure at the identical call path.
- Every NCCL transport/algorithm knob.
- A one-card test proves nothing: NCCL short-circuits at
world_size=1, which is exactly why the two replicas work at all. - Independent corroboration: StillDeadcode/vllm-radiance Codeberg issue #22 —
different host, same image, kernel 7.0.0-30, same
enqueue.ccfailure.
Test plan (when the hardware changes)
The verdict to look for is one line of lspci, before touching any model:
sudo lspci -vv -s <card2> | grep AtomicOpsCtl # want: ReqEn+
If that reads ReqEn+, the rest is mechanical: --tensor-parallel-size 2 with
HIP_VISIBLE_DEVICES=0,1, then the same benchmark set
(scripts/bench-turn-latency.py, and the endpoint's own timings block) so the
two architectures are compared on identical workloads. If it still reads
ReqEn-, the card is still on a non-atomic path — check lspci -tv for the
bridge chain rather than assuming the move worked.
Rule for any future multi-GPU collective experiment: stop and mask the
production service first (sudo systemctl stop frank-medium && sudo systemctl mask frank-medium, per the benchmarking policy), or run it on a host that is
not serving users. On 2026-09-16 a bare RCCL P2P probe was run against the live
service; the host went hard down ~20 minutes later (no ARP, no ICMP, required a
power cycle). The mechanism is not proven, but a hung AQL dispatch wedging the
GPU driver is a plausible cause and this host has precedent for going
unreachable until a power cycle.
The third path, and the one in production: llama.cpp's layer split
Everything above is about collectives, and vLLM cannot proceed without them
in any of its parallelisms — TP needs a per-layer allreduce, and PP's stage
handoff is a p2p send/recv of the hidden state, the primitive this host
also fails. llama.cpp's --split-mode layer needs no collective at all:
layers are distributed across the cards and the boundary activation is a
plain per-backend copy, once per forward pass. No RCCL kernel is ever launched
on the second card, so the atomics gate never comes up.
That is what frank-medium runs today (frank-medium-llamacpp-dflash2): one
process, one model, both cards, 262144 context. Measured against tensor split
on this host: 1991 t/s prefill / 18.8 tok/s decode layer-split, against 272 /
26.3 tensor (butterfly fallback, no RCCL). Tensor would still win decode on a
build with a working RCCL — which is exactly what the M.2 riser or a board swap
in the short answer would buy.
So the ranking changed on 2026-09-16: software already gets both cards onto one model, and the hardware fix is no longer a means to that end — it is a means to tensor parallelism, which buys ~40 % decode and would let this runtime drop layer-split's serial stages entirely.
What would change the answer
- An RCCL build whose kernels stop declaring a hostcall buffer — the one software route that is not closed. See the last row of the escape table for the hypothesis, its counter-evidence, and the two-command test.
- The symmetric-kernel path inside RCCL, if a release ever ships the device API
(
ncclDevComm*) that torch's symmetric-memory path needs. The shipped release does not. - Firmware or an AGESA update that makes the chipset bridges advertise atomic
routing — a capability bit, so this would show up in
lspcion either side. - A GPU-side workaround: none found in ROCclr, and the gate is per-device, queried once at probe.
See Also
- Pipeline Parallelism/index — two-machine research (the PP variant of this problem)
- Dankserver System Specs — hardware inventory
- Observability — the scrape/dashboard/alert stack around these endpoints