Determine autograd engine ready queue based on InputMetadata instead of InputBuffer #135633
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
[ghstack-poisoned]
🔗 Helpful Links🧪 See artifacts and rendered test results at hud.pytorch.org/pr/135633
Note: Links to docs will display an error until the docs builds have been completed. ✅ No FailuresAs of commit ae8e3bc with merge base c7b0d4b ( This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI and updates every 15 minutes. |
awgu
reviewed
Sep 11, 2024
…'s device" Thanks awgu for raising this issue and the small repro From offline discussion with albanD, in the case where a forward returns multiple outputs with different devices, we'd want to select the ready queue based on the device of the first one. Even though this is somewhat arbitrary, we prefer this over deciding which ready queue to push based on whichever input buffer's we happen to compute last, which can vary depending on more factors and thus be harder to reason about. This is in theory bc-breaking, but it seems unlikely that someone would depend on this behavior. [ghstack-poisoned]
soulitzer
changed the title
albanD
reviewed
Sep 13, 2024
torch/csrc/autograd/engine.cpp
Outdated
| if (is_ready) { | ||
| auto queue = ready_queue(cpu_ready_queue, input_buffer.device()); | ||
| // NB: The first forward output's device determines the queue | ||
| auto queue = ready_queue(cpu_ready_queue, next.function->input_metadata(0).device()); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we want to preserve the non-CPU device being prioritized.
Could you update this by passing the input metadatas to the InputBuffer struct and make the .device() method there use that instead of the current buffer?
…t's device" Thanks awgu for raising this issue and the small repro From offline discussion with albanD, in the case where a forward returns multiple outputs with different devices, we'd want to select the ready queue based on the device of the first one. Even though this is somewhat arbitrary, we prefer this over deciding which ready queue to push based on whichever input buffer's we happen to compute last, which can vary depending on more factors and thus be harder to reason about. This is in theory bc-breaking, but it seems unlikely that someone would depend on this behavior. [ghstack-poisoned]
…t's device" Thanks awgu for raising this issue and the small repro From offline discussion with albanD, in the case where a forward returns multiple outputs with different devices, we'd want to select the ready queue based on the device of the first one. Even though this is somewhat arbitrary, we prefer this over deciding which ready queue to push based on whichever input buffer's we happen to compute last, which can vary depending on more factors and thus be harder to reason about. This is in theory bc-breaking, but it seems unlikely that someone would depend on this behavior. [ghstack-poisoned]
soulitzer
changed the title
…ta instead of InputBuffer" Thanks awgu for raising this issue and the small repro From offline discussion with albanD, in the case where a forward returns multiple outputs with different devices, we'd want to select the ready queue based on the device of the first one. Even though this is somewhat arbitrary, we prefer this over deciding which ready queue to push based on whichever input buffer's we happen to compute last, which can vary depending on more factors and thus be harder to reason about. This is in theory bc-breaking, but it seems unlikely that someone would depend on this behavior. [ghstack-poisoned]
|
thanks for this @soulitzer ! |
|
@pytorchbot merge |
Merge startedYour 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 |
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):
Thanks @awgu for raising this issue and the small repro
From offline discussion with @albanD, in the case where a forward returns multiple outputs with different devices, we'd want to select the ready queue based on the device of the first one. Even though this is somewhat arbitrary, we prefer this over deciding which ready queue to push based on whichever input buffer's we happen to compute last, which can vary depending on more factors and thus be harder to reason about. This is in theory bc-breaking, but it seems unlikely that someone would depend on this behavior.
cc @voznesenskym @penguinwu @EikanWang @jgong5 @Guobing-Chen @XiaobingSuper @zhuhaozhe @blzheng @wenzhe-nrv @jiayisunx @ipiszy @yf225 @chenyang78 @kadeng @muchulee8 @ColinPeppler @amjames @desertfire @chauhang