[PyTorch] AOTI: use array of constants #111815
Closed
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
We continue to allow the user to set clients with a map, but under the hood we use an array of constants. model_container thought it was OK to hand over the map, assume we just kept a pointer, and then mutate the map later; I had to fix that. I hope there aren't other sites that do the same thing... Differential Revision: [D50111512](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D50111512/) [ghstack-poisoned]
🔗 Helpful Links🧪 See artifacts and rendered test results at hud.pytorch.org/pr/111815
Note: Links to docs will display an error until the docs builds have been completed. ✅ You can merge normally! (1 Unrelated Failure)As of commit ec427f3 with merge base e9422b1 ( BROKEN TRUNK - The following job failed but were present on the merge base:👉 Rebase onto the `viable/strict` branch to avoid these failures
This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI and updates every 15 minutes. |
We continue to allow the user to set clients with a map, but under the hood we use an array of constants. model_container thought it was OK to hand over the map, assume we just kept a pointer, and then mutate the map later; I had to fix that. I hope there aren't other sites that do the same thing... Differential Revision: [D50111512](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D50111512/) cc voznesenskym penguinwu EikanWang jgong5 Guobing-Chen XiaobingSuper zhuhaozhe blzheng wenzhe-nrv jiayisunx peterbell10 ipiszy yf225 chenyang78 kadeng muchulee8 aakhundov ColinPeppler [ghstack-poisoned]
swolchok
requested review from
desertfire,
jansel and
muchulee8
and removed request for
desertfire and
jansel
jansel
approved these changes
Oct 23, 2023
desertfire
approved these changes
Oct 24, 2023
pytorchmergebot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 24, 2023
The OSS selection mechanism does not work internally, and doesn't make sense when the machine building the .so and the machine executing it may be different anyway. Differential Revision: [D50140024](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D50140024/) Pull Request resolved: #111816 Approved by: https://github.com/jansel, https://github.com/msaroufim ghstack dependencies: #111815
pytorchmergebot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 24, 2023
Calling the `aoti_torch_{device_type,dtype}` functions on
each iteration can impose high costs on overhead-bound CPU models
because they can't be inlined across a DSO boundary. If we call them
on load, we can use simple load instructions at run time.
Differential Revision: [D50563682](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D50563682/)
Pull Request resolved: #111820
Approved by: https://github.com/chenyang78, https://github.com/desertfire
ghstack dependencies: #111815, #111816
xuhancn
pushed a commit
to xuhancn/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 7, 2023
We continue to allow the user to set clients with a map, but under the hood we use an array of constants. model_container thought it was OK to hand over the map, assume we just kept a pointer, and then mutate the map later; I had to fix that. I hope there aren't other sites that do the same thing... Differential Revision: [D50111512](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D50111512/) Pull Request resolved: pytorch#111815 Approved by: https://github.com/jansel, https://github.com/desertfire
xuhancn
pushed a commit
to xuhancn/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 7, 2023
The OSS selection mechanism does not work internally, and doesn't make sense when the machine building the .so and the machine executing it may be different anyway. Differential Revision: [D50140024](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D50140024/) Pull Request resolved: pytorch#111816 Approved by: https://github.com/jansel, https://github.com/msaroufim ghstack dependencies: pytorch#111815
xuhancn
pushed a commit
to xuhancn/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 7, 2023
…1820) Calling the `aoti_torch_{device_type,dtype}` functions on each iteration can impose high costs on overhead-bound CPU models because they can't be inlined across a DSO boundary. If we call them on load, we can use simple load instructions at run time. Differential Revision: [D50563682](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D50563682/) Pull Request resolved: pytorch#111820 Approved by: https://github.com/chenyang78, https://github.com/desertfire ghstack dependencies: pytorch#111815, pytorch#111816
Skylion007
pushed a commit
to Skylion007/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 14, 2023
We continue to allow the user to set clients with a map, but under the hood we use an array of constants. model_container thought it was OK to hand over the map, assume we just kept a pointer, and then mutate the map later; I had to fix that. I hope there aren't other sites that do the same thing... Differential Revision: [D50111512](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D50111512/) Pull Request resolved: pytorch#111815 Approved by: https://github.com/jansel, https://github.com/desertfire
Skylion007
pushed a commit
to Skylion007/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 14, 2023
The OSS selection mechanism does not work internally, and doesn't make sense when the machine building the .so and the machine executing it may be different anyway. Differential Revision: [D50140024](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D50140024/) Pull Request resolved: pytorch#111816 Approved by: https://github.com/jansel, https://github.com/msaroufim ghstack dependencies: pytorch#111815
Skylion007
pushed a commit
to Skylion007/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 14, 2023
…1820) Calling the `aoti_torch_{device_type,dtype}` functions on each iteration can impose high costs on overhead-bound CPU models because they can't be inlined across a DSO boundary. If we call them on load, we can use simple load instructions at run time. Differential Revision: [D50563682](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D50563682/) Pull Request resolved: pytorch#111820 Approved by: https://github.com/chenyang78, https://github.com/desertfire ghstack dependencies: pytorch#111815, pytorch#111816
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Stack from ghstack (oldest at bottom):
We continue to allow the user to set clients with a map, but under the hood we use an array of constants.
model_container thought it was OK to hand over the map, assume we just
kept a pointer, and then mutate the map later; I had to fix that. I
hope there aren't other sites that do the same thing...
Differential Revision: D50111512
cc @voznesenskym @penguinwu @EikanWang @jgong5 @Guobing-Chen @XiaobingSuper @zhuhaozhe @blzheng @wenzhe-nrv @jiayisunx @peterbell10 @ipiszy @yf225 @chenyang78 @kadeng @muchulee8 @aakhundov @ColinPeppler