Rename flashmla kernel options of nsa backend for better readability

[Fridge003]

Motivation

• Rename --nsa-prefill and --nsa-decode to --nsa-prefill-backend and --nsa-decode-backend
• Add documents for --nsa-prefill-backend and --nsa-decode-backend arguments
• Rename flashmla_prefill and flashmla_decode kernel choices to flashmla_sparse and flashmla_kv, so misunderstanding can be avoided.

Modifications

Accuracy Tests

Benchmarking and Profiling

Checklist

• Format your code according to the Format code with pre-commit.
• Add unit tests according to the Run and add unit tests.
• Update documentation according to Write documentations.
• Provide accuracy and speed benchmark results according to Test the accuracy and Benchmark the speed.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @Fridge003, 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 focuses on improving the clarity and readability of the NSA backend's configuration options. It renames both the command-line arguments and the underlying kernel implementation choices to be more descriptive, along with updating the relevant documentation to reflect these changes. The goal is to prevent confusion and make the system easier to understand and use.

Highlights

• Argument Renaming: The command-line arguments --nsa-prefill and --nsa-decode have been renamed to --nsa-prefill-backend and --nsa-decode-backend respectively, enhancing clarity by explicitly indicating they configure backend implementations.
• Kernel Choice Renaming: The internal kernel choices flashmla_prefill and flashmla_decode have been renamed to flashmla_sparse and flashmla_kv to better reflect their function and avoid potential misunderstandings.
• Documentation Update: New documentation has been added for the renamed --nsa-prefill-backend and --nsa-decode-backend arguments, ensuring users are aware of the changes and their purpose.

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. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request refactors the naming of NSA backend kernel options for better readability. The changes include renaming command-line arguments, internal constants, and function names. The documentation has also been updated to reflect these new names. Overall, the changes are consistent and improve code clarity. I have one comment regarding a change in a default argument value, which appears to be a functional change rather than just a rename, and I've requested clarification on whether this was intended.