This PR:
- changes generate_vmap_rule to either be True or False. Previously it
could be True, False, or not set. This simplifies the implementation a
bit.
- changes the vmap staticmethod to always be on the autograd.Function
rather than sometimes defined.
This is how the other staticmethod (forward, backward, jvp) are
implemented and allows us to document it.
There are 4 possible states for the autograd.Function w.r.t. to the
above:
- generate_vmap_rule is True, vmap staticmethod overriden. This raises
an error when used with vmap.
- generate_vmap_rule is False, vmap staticmethod overriden. This is
valid.
- generate_vmap_rule is True, vmap staticmethod not overriden. This is
valid.
- generate_vmap_rule is False, vmap staticmethod not overriden. This
raises an error when used with vmap.
Future:
- setup_context needs the same treatment, but that's a bit tricker to
implement.
Test Plan:
- new unittest
- existing tests
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/91787
Approved by: https://github.com/soulitzer
This PR:
- Updates autograd.Function.forward docs to reflect how you either
define a forward with ctx or a separate forward and setup_context
- Updates the "Extending Autograd" docs to suggest the usage of
autograd.Function with separate forward and setup_context. This should
be the default because there is a low barrier to go from this to
an autograd.Function that is fully supported by functorch transforms.
- Adds a new "Extending torch.func with autograd.Function" doc that
explains how to use autograd.Function with torch.func. It also
explains how to use generate_vmap_rule and how to manually write a
vmap staticmethod.
While writing this, I noticed that the implementation of
setup_context staticmethod/generate_vmap_rule/vmap staticmethod are a
bit inconsistent with the other method/attributes on autograd.Function:
- https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/91451
- I'm happy to fix those if we think it is a problem, either in this PR
or a followup (this PR is getting long, I want some initial docs
out that I can point early adopters at, and fixing the problems in the
future isn't really BC-breaking).
Test Plan:
- view docs preview
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/91452
Approved by: https://github.com/soulitzer
Essentially the same change as #67946, except that the default is to disallow reduced precision reductions in `BFloat16` GEMMs (for now). If performance is severely regressed, we can change the default, but this option appears to be necessary to pass some `addmm` `BFloat16` tests on H100.
CC @ptrblck @ngimel
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/89172
Approved by: https://github.com/ngimel
Fixes#43144
This uses the Backend system added by [82682](https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/82682) to change allocators dynamically during the code execution. This will allow us to use RMM, use CUDA managed memory for some portions of the code that do not fit in GPU memory. Write static memory allocators to reduce fragmentation while training models and improve interoperability with external DL compilers/libraries.
For example, we could have the following allocator in c++
```c++
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <cuda_runtime_api.h>
#include <iostream>
extern "C" {
void* my_malloc(ssize_t size, int device, cudaStream_t stream) {
void *ptr;
std::cout<<"alloc "<< size<<std::endl;
cudaMalloc(&ptr, size);
return ptr;
}
void my_free(void* ptr) {
std::cout<<"free "<<std::endl;
cudaFree(ptr);
}
}
```
Compile it as a shared library
```
nvcc allocator.cc -o alloc.so -shared --compiler-options '-fPIC'
```
And use it from PyTorch as follows
```python
import torch
# Init caching
# b = torch.zeros(10, device='cuda')
new_alloc = torch.cuda.memory.CUDAPluggableAllocator('alloc.so', 'my_malloc', 'my_free')
old = torch.cuda.memory.get_current_allocator()
torch.cuda.memory.change_current_allocator(new_alloc)
b = torch.zeros(10, device='cuda')
# This will error since the current allocator was already instantiated
torch.cuda.memory.change_current_allocator(old)
```
Things to discuss
- How to test this, needs compiling external code ...
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/86786
Approved by: https://github.com/albanD
Summary:
Improved roundup_power2_divisions knob so it allows better control of rouding in the PyTorch CUDA Caching Allocator.
This new version allows setting the number of divisions per power of two interval starting from 1MB and ending at 64GB and above. An example use case is when rouding is desirable for small allocations but there are also very large allocations which are persistent, thus would not benefit from rounding and take up extra space.
Test Plan: Tested locally
Differential Revision: D40103909
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/87290
Approved by: https://github.com/zdevito
Fixes#83973 (This is a substitute PR for https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/85024)
First of all, thanks for your invaluable contributions to PyTorch everyone!
Given how extensively `torch.cuda.is_available` is used in the PyTorch ecosystem, IMHO it's worthwhile to provide downstream libraries/frameworks/users the ability to alter the default behavior of `torch.cuda.is_available` in the context of their PyTorch usage.
I'm confident there are many current and future such use cases which could benefit from leveraging a weakened, NVML-based `torch.cuda.is_available` assessment at a downstream framework's explicit direction (thanks @malfet 81da50a972 !). Though one could always patch out the `torch.cuda.is_available` function with another implementation in a downstream library, I think this environmental variable based configuration option is more convenient and the cost to including the option is quite low.
As discussed in https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/85024#issuecomment-1261542045, this PR gates new non-default NVML-based CUDA behavior with an environmental variable (PYTORCH_NVML_BASED_CUDA_CHK) that allows a user/framework to invoke non-default, NVML-based `is_available()` assessments if desired.
Thanks again for your work everyone!
@ngimel @malfet @awaelchli
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/85951
Approved by: https://github.com/ngimel
Summary:
Added an additional roundup knob( ``roundup_bypass_threshold_mb``) to bypass rounding the requested allocation size, for allocation requests larger than the threshold value (in MB). This can help reduce the memory footprint when making large allocations that are expected to be persistent or have a large lifetime.
Differential Revision: D39868104
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/85940
Approved by: https://github.com/zdevito
In preparation of adopting future rocblas library options, it is necessary to track when the backward pass of training is executing. The scope-based helper class `BackwardPassGuard` is provided to toggle state.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/71881
Approved by: https://github.com/albanD
Summary:
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/74261
### Goal
Implement a cheap way to reclaim GPU memory (garbage collection) without incurring GPU sync.
### Why do we need this?
Currently, there are only two ways to reclaim GPU memory block already assigned to a particular stream.
- `release_available_cached_blocks(params)`: Free blocks exceeding the `CachingAllocatorConfig::max_split_size()` until we can satisfy the request.
Issue: If the `max_split_size` is unset (default), this function is a no-op. Even if this is set, the reclamation is quite conservative (e.g., never frees blocks under max_split_size).
- `release_cached_blocks()`: Waits for all the in-flight events and then reclaim blocks.
Issue: 'waiting for all event' is very expensive as it will likely stall all the GPU operations. Many GPU applications without a proper handling of potential GPU throttling would suffer/crash.
### Proposed idea
- If the garbage collection threshold is set, try to reclaim some memory blocks *without* synchronization. It should be safe to do so, as `release_available_cached_blocks` essentially does the same thing (but less aggressively).
- GC is triggered only when we fail to serve a `malloc` request from the block pool. No need to free blocks when the block pool is functioning just fine.
- Prioritize reclaiming blocks that weren't reused for long time. Reclamation stops once the used memory capacity < threshold.
- This code path is totally optional; by default it won't be invoked.
Test Plan:
- Unit tests
- Manually checked that the GPU memory usage stays as indicated by the garbage collector. If not the caching allocator at least tries to keep freeing the blocks.
Reviewed By: jianyuh
Differential Revision: D34482514
fbshipit-source-id: d5eae62ac60b94b0bca851f9d233a092d086e3c2
(cherry picked from commit 05780f1ed4b176f05e765b2411c9eaa2eaeb48b0)
Summary:
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/74213
In the current CUDACachingAllocator, the sizes are rounded up in multiple of blocks size of 512, so this works for smaller sizes. However for large sizes, we can have lots of different size blocks in the larger pool. This is problematic when we have variable batch sizes 1001, 1021, 1023 -> all will go to different block size and will create different size of blocks. This will create lots of unused blocks and will waste GPU memory capacity.
This diff adds a rounding approach to allocation size. It rounds up the size to nearest power-of-2 divisions and the power2-division can be changed with env variable setting.
For example, if we need to round-up size of1200 and if number of divisions is 4,
the size 1200 lies between 1024 and 2048 and if we do 4 divisions between
them, the values are 1024, 1280, 1536, and 1792. So the function will
return 1280 as the nearest ceiling of power-2 division.
env setting:
export PYTORCH_CUDA_ALLOC_CONF=roundup_power2_divisions:4
ghstack-source-id: 151446017
Reviewed By: ezyang
Differential Revision: D34868036
fbshipit-source-id: 494785add16e6b37c920dcb5a2b81d4c637b554a
(cherry picked from commit 548454ccacbd8700e7ffd2d762e40b4ba37abbae)
