KEMBAR78
Generalize toAccumulateType() by qqaatw · Pull Request #108248 · pytorch/pytorch · GitHub
Skip to content

Conversation

@qqaatw
Copy link
Collaborator

@qqaatw qqaatw commented Aug 30, 2023

Stack from ghstack (oldest at bottom):

Trying to address this comment: #106666 (comment)

cc @albanD @kulinseth

[ghstack-poisoned]
@pytorch-bot
Copy link

pytorch-bot bot commented Aug 30, 2023

🔗 Helpful Links

🧪 See artifacts and rendered test results at hud.pytorch.org/pr/108248

Note: Links to docs will display an error until the docs builds have been completed.

✅ No Failures

As of commit b9fe25c with merge base 92f4a7b (image):
💚 Looks good so far! There are no failures yet. 💚

This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI and updates every 15 minutes.

@pytorch-bot pytorch-bot bot added ciflow/mps Run MPS tests (subset of trunk) release notes: mps Release notes category labels Aug 30, 2023
qqaatw added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 30, 2023
ghstack-source-id: fa89f03
Pull Request resolved: #108248
Copy link
Collaborator

@albanD albanD left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Super cool update!

Trying to address this comment: #106666 (comment)

cc albanD kulinseth 

[ghstack-poisoned]
Trying to address this comment: #106666 (comment)

cc albanD kulinseth 

[ghstack-poisoned]
qqaatw added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 4, 2023
ghstack-source-id: 1f6a2ea
Pull Request resolved: #108248
Trying to address this comment: #106666 (comment)

cc albanD kulinseth 

[ghstack-poisoned]
qqaatw added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 4, 2023
ghstack-source-id: 97a2b15
Pull Request resolved: #108248
@qqaatw qqaatw marked this pull request as ready for review September 6, 2023 14:30
#define CUDA_ACC_TYPE(t, acc_t) ACC_TYPE(t, acc_t, c10::DeviceType::CUDA)
#define CPU_ACC_TYPE(t, acc_t) ACC_TYPE(t, acc_t, c10::DeviceType::CPU)

MPS_ACC_TYPE(BFloat16, float);
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks great! Thanks for the refactor!

Trying to address this comment: #106666 (comment)

cc albanD kulinseth 

[ghstack-poisoned]
Trying to address this comment: #106666 (comment)

cc albanD kulinseth 

[ghstack-poisoned]
qqaatw added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 7, 2023
ghstack-source-id: 905afd1
Pull Request resolved: #108248
Trying to address this comment: #106666 (comment)

cc albanD kulinseth 

[ghstack-poisoned]
qqaatw added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 12, 2023
ghstack-source-id: c8f5e64
Pull Request resolved: #108248
@qqaatw qqaatw requested a review from albanD September 12, 2023 16:36
Copy link
Collaborator

@albanD albanD left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Change sounds good.
I just want a quick stamp from Kulin to make sure the double complex handling is fine.

MPS_ACC_TYPE(bool, bool);
MPS_ACC_TYPE(c10::complex<Half>, c10::complex<float>);
MPS_ACC_TYPE(c10::complex<float>, c10::complex<float>);
MPS_ACC_TYPE(c10::complex<double>, c10::complex<float>);
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

cc @kulinseth just to confirm that this is ok to have this for now.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can we issue a warning that we are falling back to using float for double types ?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm a bit concerned about that would be somewhat verbose from a user's point of view since accumulate type is an internal thing of which a regular user probably doesn't have idea.

What do you think @albanD?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not sure what is the best place to put this warning for sure. Also note that the user would need to have created a compleex to begin with to reach this.
So I would say that not having a warning here is fine?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If the current state is fine, this PR needs your approval @albanD. Thanks!

Copy link
Collaborator

@kulinseth kulinseth left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Other than the warning . This looks good to me

Copy link
Collaborator

@albanD albanD left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

SGTM

@qqaatw
Copy link
Collaborator Author

qqaatw commented Sep 29, 2023

@pytorchbot merge -r

@pytorch-bot pytorch-bot bot added the ciflow/trunk Trigger trunk jobs on your pull request label Sep 29, 2023
@pytorchmergebot
Copy link
Collaborator

@pytorchbot started a rebase job onto refs/remotes/origin/viable/strict. Check the current status here

Trying to address this comment: #106666 (comment)

cc albanD kulinseth 

[ghstack-poisoned]
@pytorchmergebot
Copy link
Collaborator

Successfully rebased gh/qqaatw/19/orig onto refs/remotes/origin/viable/strict, please pull locally before adding more changes (for example, via ghstack checkout https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/108248)

pytorchmergebot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 29, 2023
ghstack-source-id: 63e414e
Pull Request resolved: #108248
@pytorchmergebot
Copy link
Collaborator

Merge started

Your change will be merged once all checks pass (ETA 0-4 Hours).

Learn more about merging in the wiki.

Questions? Feedback? Please reach out to the PyTorch DevX Team

Advanced Debugging
Check the merge workflow status
here

@pytorchmergebot
Copy link
Collaborator

Merge failed

Reason: 1 jobs have failed, first few of them are: Mac MPS / macos-13-py3-arm64-mps / test (default, 1, 1)

Details for Dev Infra team Raised by workflow job

Trying to address this comment: #106666 (comment)

cc albanD kulinseth 

[ghstack-poisoned]
qqaatw added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 2, 2023
ghstack-source-id: ea08786
Pull Request resolved: #108248
@qqaatw
Copy link
Collaborator Author

qqaatw commented Oct 2, 2023

@pytorchbot merge

@pytorchmergebot
Copy link
Collaborator

Merge started

Your change will be merged once all checks pass (ETA 0-4 Hours).

Learn more about merging in the wiki.

Questions? Feedback? Please reach out to the PyTorch DevX Team

Advanced Debugging
Check the merge workflow status
here

@pytorchmergebot
Copy link
Collaborator

Merge failed

Reason: 1 jobs have failed, first few of them are: trunk / macos-12-py3-arm64 / build

Details for Dev Infra team Raised by workflow job

@qqaatw
Copy link
Collaborator Author

qqaatw commented Oct 2, 2023

@pytorchbot merge

@pytorchmergebot
Copy link
Collaborator

Merge started

Your change will be merged once all checks pass (ETA 0-4 Hours).

Learn more about merging in the wiki.

Questions? Feedback? Please reach out to the PyTorch DevX Team

Advanced Debugging
Check the merge workflow status
here

@facebook-github-bot facebook-github-bot deleted the gh/qqaatw/19/head branch October 6, 2023 14:23
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

ciflow/mps Run MPS tests (subset of trunk) ciflow/trunk Trigger trunk jobs on your pull request Merged open source release notes: mps Release notes category

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants