KEMBAR78
Handle item() on boolean tensor by ezyang · Pull Request #114157 · pytorch/pytorch · GitHub
Skip to content

Handle item() on boolean tensor #114157

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Handle item() on boolean tensor #114157

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

@ezyang
Copy link
Contributor

@ezyang ezyang commented Nov 20, 2023 •
edited by pytorch-bot bot
Loading

Stack from ghstack (oldest at bottom):

This needs some special handling because we don't actually allocate
boolean symbols in sympy; we allocate an integer indicator variable.
See comment for more details.

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang ezyang@meta.com

cc @voznesenskym @penguinwu @EikanWang @jgong5 @Guobing-Chen @XiaobingSuper @zhuhaozhe @blzheng @wenzhe-nrv @jiayisunx @peterbell10 @ipiszy @yf225 @chenyang78 @kadeng @muchulee8 @aakhundov @ColinPeppler

@ezyang
Handle item() on boolean tensor
789cf0d 
This needs some special handling because we don't actually allocate
boolean symbols in sympy; we allocate an integer indicator variable.
See comment for more details.

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@meta.com>

[ghstack-poisoned]
@pytorch-bot
Copy link

pytorch-bot bot commented Nov 20, 2023 •
edited
Loading

🔗 Helpful Links

🧪 See artifacts and rendered test results at hud.pytorch.org/pr/114157

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

✅ No Failures

As of commit 3088bd2 with merge base 9d2425c (image):
💚 Looks good so far! There are no failures yet. 💚

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

ydwu4
ydwu4 approved these changes Nov 20, 2023
View reviewed changes
torch/_inductor/ir.py Outdated
# Special case for boolean. For Reasons(TM), we don't represent
# boolean variables directly in sympy; instead, we generate an
# indicator integer variable which we then convert to a boolean by
# testing i0 == 0. We have to identify the underlying indicator
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nit: should it be testing i0 == 1?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

oops yeah

@albanD albanD removed their request for review November 20, 2023 20:51
@ezyang
Update on "Handle item() on boolean tensor"
3088bd2 
This needs some special handling because we don't actually allocate
boolean symbols in sympy; we allocate an integer indicator variable.
See comment for more details.

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyangmeta.com>

cc voznesenskym penguinwu EikanWang jgong5 Guobing-Chen XiaobingSuper zhuhaozhe blzheng wenzhe-nrv jiayisunx peterbell10 ipiszy yf225 chenyang78 kadeng muchulee8 aakhundov ColinPeppler

[ghstack-poisoned]
@ezyang
Copy link
Contributor Author

ezyang commented Nov 21, 2023

@pytorchbot merge -f "commentfix only"

ezyang added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 21, 2023
@ezyang
Handle item() on boolean tensor
14656d1 
This needs some special handling because we don't actually allocate
boolean symbols in sympy; we allocate an integer indicator variable.
See comment for more details.

Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyangmeta.com>

ghstack-source-id: 7a9cab8
Pull Request resolved: #114157
@pytorchmergebot
Copy link
Collaborator

Merge started

Your change will be merged immediately since you used the force (-f) flag, bypassing any CI checks (ETA: 1-5 minutes). Please use -f as last resort and instead consider -i/--ignore-current to continue the merge ignoring current failures. This will allow currently pending tests to finish and report signal before the merge.

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/ezyang/2465/head branch November 24, 2023 15:27
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@ydwu4 ydwu4 ydwu4 approved these changes

@antoniojkim antoniojkim Awaiting requested review from antoniojkim

@bdhirsh bdhirsh Awaiting requested review from bdhirsh

@miladm miladm Awaiting requested review from miladm

@SherlockNoMad SherlockNoMad Awaiting requested review from SherlockNoMad

@voznesenskym voznesenskym Awaiting requested review from voznesenskym

@wconstab wconstab Awaiting requested review from wconstab

@aakhundov aakhundov Awaiting requested review from aakhundov

@Chillee Chillee Awaiting requested review from Chillee

@tugsbayasgalan tugsbayasgalan Awaiting requested review from tugsbayasgalan

@lezcano lezcano Awaiting requested review from lezcano

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

ciflow/inductor Merged module: inductor

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@ezyang @pytorchmergebot @ydwu4