KEMBAR78
logsumexp for multiple dimensions by umanwizard · Pull Request #16475 · pytorch/pytorch · GitHub
Skip to content

Conversation

@umanwizard
Copy link
Contributor

Move logsumexp and max_values to TensorIterator and use it to make logsumexp work for multiple dimensions.

Timings on a tensor of shape (10,1000000,10), for each combination of (cpu, single-threaded cpu, gpu) and dimension:

before
208 ms ± 2.72 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
279 ms ± 5.07 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
199 ms ± 2.64 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
1.11 s ± 33.3 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
1.25 s ± 25.3 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
1.11 s ± 6.83 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
15.4 ms ± 1.02 µs per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 100 loops each)
132 ms ± 30.1 µs per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 10 loops each)
39.6 ms ± 19.1 µs per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 10 loops each)

after
199 ms ± 8.23 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
307 ms ± 8.73 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
207 ms ± 7.62 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 10 loops each)
1.16 s ± 8.92 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
1.26 s ± 47.6 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
1.13 s ± 13.7 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
15.4 ms ± 868 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 100 loops each)
132 ms ± 27.6 µs per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 10 loops each)
39.6 ms ± 21.8 µs per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 10 loops each)

@facebook-github-bot facebook-github-bot added the oncall: jit Add this issue/PR to JIT oncall triage queue label Jan 29, 2019
@umanwizard
Copy link
Contributor Author

I think the higher time for dim=1 on CPU was a fluke. I ran it again and got 237 ms.

Copy link
Contributor

@facebook-github-bot facebook-github-bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@umanwizard has imported this pull request. If you are a Facebook employee, you can view this diff on Phabricator.

Copy link
Contributor

@facebook-github-bot facebook-github-bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@umanwizard has imported this pull request. If you are a Facebook employee, you can view this diff on Phabricator.

Copy link
Contributor

@facebook-github-bot facebook-github-bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@umanwizard has imported this pull request. If you are a Facebook employee, you can view this diff on Phabricator.

Copy link
Contributor

@facebook-github-bot facebook-github-bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@umanwizard has imported this pull request. If you are a Facebook employee, you can view this diff on Phabricator.

Copy link
Contributor

@facebook-github-bot facebook-github-bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@umanwizard has imported this pull request. If you are a Facebook employee, you can view this diff on Phabricator.

Copy link
Contributor

@facebook-github-bot facebook-github-bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@umanwizard has imported this pull request. If you are a Facebook employee, you can view this diff on Phabricator.

Copy link
Contributor

@facebook-github-bot facebook-github-bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@umanwizard has imported this pull request. If you are a Facebook employee, you can view this diff on Phabricator.

Copy link
Contributor

@facebook-github-bot facebook-github-bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@umanwizard has imported this pull request. If you are a Facebook employee, you can view this diff on Phabricator.

zdevito pushed a commit to zdevito/ATen that referenced this pull request Feb 5, 2019
Summary:
Move `logsumexp` and `max_values` to `TensorIterator` and use it to make `logsumexp` work for multiple dimensions.

Timings on a tensor of shape `(10,1000000,10)`, for each combination of (cpu, single-threaded cpu, gpu) and dimension:

**before**
208 ms ± 2.72 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
279 ms ± 5.07 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
199 ms ± 2.64 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
1.11 s ± 33.3 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
1.25 s ± 25.3 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
1.11 s ± 6.83 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
15.4 ms ± 1.02 µs per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 100 loops each)
132 ms ± 30.1 µs per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 10 loops each)
39.6 ms ± 19.1 µs per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 10 loops each)

**after**
199 ms ± 8.23 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
307 ms ± 8.73 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
207 ms ± 7.62 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 10 loops each)
1.16 s ± 8.92 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
1.26 s ± 47.6 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
1.13 s ± 13.7 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
15.4 ms ± 868 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 100 loops each)
132 ms ± 27.6 µs per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 10 loops each)
39.6 ms ± 21.8 µs per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 10 loops each)
Pull Request resolved: pytorch/pytorch#16475

Differential Revision: D13855746

Pulled By: umanwizard

fbshipit-source-id: aaacc0b967c3f89073487e1952ae6f76b7bd7ad3
@ezyang ezyang added the merged label Jun 25, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

oncall: jit Add this issue/PR to JIT oncall triage queue

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants