This PR enables all PIE rules on ruff, there are already some enabled rules from this family, the new added rules are
```
PIE796 Enum contains duplicate value: {value}
PIE808 Unnecessary start argument in range
```
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/165814
Approved by: https://github.com/ezyang
This PR enables all PIE rules on ruff, there are already some enabled rules from this family, the new added rules are
```
PIE796 Enum contains duplicate value: {value}
PIE808 Unnecessary start argument in range
```
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/165814
Approved by: https://github.com/ezyang
Fixes#161014
This bug fix introduces a fix that is consistent with the exception handling. Outlined in issue #161014, there is an edge case where the negative padding does not make the tensor size negative but still triggers the exception that the size is negative. The fix is simply adding `new_dim >=0` to include the zero dim and letting the operator return an empty tensor.
In the PR I have added the edge case where the test will now check the negative padding where the dimension gets reduced to zero. But the sample is only for the `constant` type of padding. I would like some feedback if it is necessary to put the same sample on the `reduce` type as well.
This is my first PR to contribute to PyTorch and any help/feedback will be welcome! Thank you!
@malfet @manuelcandales @janeyx99 @ezyang
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/161639
Approved by: https://github.com/manuelcandales
These decompositions take precedence before CIA decomps in fake tensor prop, as a result, we would hit this implementation for all where overloads which is wrong in some cases. For the overloads that can't be implemented by this decomp, we just run the default CIA impl. Previously this doesn't matter because in post-dispatch IR, aten.where would have decomposed but when user tries to preserve aten.where this issue will surface because fake tensor will start seeing aten.where.
Differential Revision: [D82604702](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D82604702)
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/163138
Approved by: https://github.com/henryoier, https://github.com/ezyang
[relanding again after fixing internal build]
Summary:
This might cause some new DDEs on call sites that do not use is_contiguous_or_false() or sym_is_contiguous()
but want to find those call sites to handle this properly by calling is_contiguous_or_false() and not is_contiguous() explitly when appropriate.
I had to fix one issue after removing the implicit size oblivious reasoning. here is context
we defined in this https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/157472 sym_is_contiguous to be the function computing contiguity for dynamic shapes in c++. It returns a symbolic expression that represents contiguity and guaranteed not to throw a DDE.
when people call is_contiguous we do sym_is_contiguous().guard_bool()
when people call is_contiguous_or_false we do sym_is_contiguous().guard_or_false()
one issue not handled well was this path
```
c10::SymBool TensorImpl::sym_is_contiguous_custom(
at::MemoryFormat memory_format) const {
if (C10_UNLIKELY(matches_python_custom(SizesStridesPolicy::CustomStrides))) {
return pyobj_slot_.load_pyobj_interpreter()->is_contiguous(
this, memory_format);
}
return sym_is_contiguous_default(memory_format);
}
```
namely if we call sym_is_contiguous_custom but we have matches_python_custom(SizesStridesPolicy::CustomStrides) return true , then we used to call is_contiguous(this, memory_format);
This used to go through the load_pyobj_interpreter and end up calling the python is_contiguous call which used implicit size oblivious reasoning.
once we removed that implicit size oblivious reasoning, the right thing we want is to call
return pyobj_slot_.load_pyobj_interpreter()->sym_is_contiguous(this, memory_format);
otherwise we would get DDE even if the caller is doing sym_is_contiguous.
so I had to define it for pyinterpreter, and then I had to override it for nested tensors.
Approved by: https://github.com/ezyang
Test Plan:
contbuild & OSS CI, see e444cd24d4
Rollback Plan:
Differential Revision: D80435179
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/160869
Approved by: https://github.com/ezyang
Fixes#161080
torch.export.export fails with TypeError: expand() got an unexpected keyword argument 'implicit' when calling torch.expand_copy(..., implicit=True). This happened because expand_copy = _make_copy_from_view(aten.expand) register aten. expand as the decomposition path for aten.expand_copy, which doesn’t accept the implicit argument.
I have added an explicit a decomposition for aten.expand_copy in torch/_decomp/decompositions.py to ignore the implicit argument, and a simple unit test to demonstrate the bug being fixed.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/161688
Approved by: https://github.com/angelayi, https://github.com/can-gaa-hou
This might cause some new DDEs on call sites that do not use is_contiguous_or_false() or sym_is_contiguous()
but want to find those call sites to handle this properly by calling is_contiguous_or_false() and not is_contiguous() explitly when appropriate.
I had to fix one issue after removing the implicit size oblivious reasoning. here is context
we defined in this https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/157472 sym_is_contiguous to be the function computing contiguity for dynamic shapes in c++. It returns a symbolic expression that represents contiguity and guaranteed not to throw a DDE.
when people call is_contiguous we do sym_is_contiguous().guard_bool()
when people call is_contiguous_or_false we do sym_is_contiguous().guard_or_false()
one issue not handled well was this path
```
c10::SymBool TensorImpl::sym_is_contiguous_custom(
at::MemoryFormat memory_format) const {
if (C10_UNLIKELY(matches_python_custom(SizesStridesPolicy::CustomStrides))) {
return pyobj_slot_.load_pyobj_interpreter()->is_contiguous(
this, memory_format);
}
return sym_is_contiguous_default(memory_format);
}
```
namely if we call sym_is_contiguous_custom but we have matches_python_custom(SizesStridesPolicy::CustomStrides) return true , then we used to call is_contiguous(this, memory_format);
This used to go through the load_pyobj_interpreter and end up calling the python is_contiguous call which used implicit size oblivious reasoning.
once we removed that implicit size oblivious reasoning, the right thing we want is to call
return pyobj_slot_.load_pyobj_interpreter()->sym_is_contiguous(this, memory_format);
otherwise we would get DDE even if the caller is doing sym_is_contiguous.
so I had to define it for pyinterpreter, and then I had to override it for nested tensors.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/159197
Approved by: https://github.com/ezyang
unbind will always specialize on dim, because it determine the number of output tensors.
guard_size_oblivious is not useful there and more confusing probably for code readers
added a comment and a test that verifies the specialization.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/148815
Approved by: https://github.com/pianpwk
