By adding a few small helpers (e.g., a `splice` method to `_MeshLayout`, and making `_init_process_groups` static and thus stateless) we can substantially shorten the definition of the unflatten method, and help readability.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/165556
Approved by: https://github.com/fduwjj
ghstack dependencies: #165554, #165555
The refactoring of DeviceMesh is heavily constrained by the signature of its constructor, which is a public API which contains some "legacy" concepts which we'd love to get rid of, such as an explicit/materialized `mesh` Tensor.
In other languages the solution to this would be to add a private overload of the constructor. Python doesn't natively allow this, but in this PR I managed to build something that approximates it.
This new private constructor basically only takes `_layout`, `_global_rank_permutation`, and `mesh_dim_names`.
With such a constructor we can effectively simplify a lot of callsites and get rid of the `_create_mesh_from_ranks` helper method. That's a good thing because it was instantiating many DeviceMeshes in a for loop, which always felt unnecessary.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/165555
Approved by: https://github.com/fduwjj, https://github.com/fegin
ghstack dependencies: #165554
The goal of this PR is to avoid storing the explicit `mesh` Tensor inside each DeviceMesh, and instead compute it on-the-fly when the end user needs it, and try to replace all of its internal usages with `_layout` and the newly-introduced `_global_rank_permutation` Tensor. The name of this attribute is up for debate. The advantage of the `_global_rank_permutation` Tensor is that it is _the same_ Tensor for the root mesh and all its children, so it doesn't need to be copied/reallocated.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/165554
Approved by: https://github.com/fduwjj
By adding a few small helpers (e.g., a `splice` method to `_MeshLayout`, and making `_init_process_groups` static and thus stateless) we can substantially shorten the definition of the unflatten method, and help readability.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/165556
Approved by: https://github.com/fduwjj
ghstack dependencies: #165554, #165555
The goal of this PR is to avoid storing the explicit `mesh` Tensor inside each DeviceMesh, and instead compute it on-the-fly when the end user needs it, and try to replace all of its internal usages with `_layout` and the newly-introduced `_global_rank_permutation` Tensor. The name of this attribute is up for debate. The advantage of the `_global_rank_permutation` Tensor is that it is _the same_ Tensor for the root mesh and all its children, so it doesn't need to be copied/reallocated.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/165554
Approved by: https://github.com/fduwjj
We want to refactor the internal bookkeeping of DeviceMesh so that:
Simply the bookkeeping logics and make it generic enough so that it is easy to support new transformations like flatten noncontiguous dim, reshape and unflatten. (We leveraged the CuTe layout). This new layout also let us handle non-contiguous slicing, flatten, transpose possible.
Concretely, in this PR, we do the following:
1. Use the `_MeshLayout` to handle all index operations rather use a map to record mesh dims.
2. Removed `flatten_name_to_root_dims`, because now we can directly get layout from a flattened device mesh.
3. Replaced `_get_slice_mesh_dims` with `_get_slice_mesh_layout`.
4. Use the newly added function `check_overlap` to check layout overlap.
5. Use a new function `to_remapping_tensor` to use layout ranks as indices when the mesh tensor is not representable as CuTe. The reason is that layout acts as a backend of mesh tensor bookkeeping (indexing indices), it needs to be used as indices for remap back to the mesh tensor for new DeviceMesh generation and backend init. For example, in the case of 2K to 4K, the underlying layout is (2K, 1) but the actual value of the mesh tensor is [2K, 2K+1, ....,]. While flattening, slicing, we need to remap the layout back to the new mesh tensor so it maps the actual device allocation. For example, in the 2K to 4K case, if the shape is (1K, 1K) with dim_names ("dp", "tp"). Then when slicing "tp", the mesh tensor should be (2K, 2K+1, ..., 3K-1) or (3K, 3K+1, ... 4K-1). not the global ranks generated from the layout. (1K, 1).
Verified that loss curve is very close for DeepSeekV3 on torchtitan, note that exact same match is challenging because even if we run the baseline twice, the loss curve does not exactly match.
<img width="1113" height="490" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/7877b5a4-337e-4ad8-b878-2378f4f0f38d" />
The PR looks big indeed but we don't change any existing behavior of DeviceMesh, so it is a pure refactor.
With this refactoring we also enabled the slicing and flatten of non-contiguous dims of a device mesh which is hard to implement without cute layout.
This is a continue of https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/161106 (original one got messed with EasyCLA)
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/163213
Approved by: https://github.com/lw, https://github.com/fegin
We want to refactor the internal bookkeeping of DeviceMesh so that:
Simply the bookkeeping logics and make it generic enough so that it is easy to support new transformations like flatten noncontiguous dim, reshape and unflatten. (We leveraged the CuTe layout). This new layout also let us handle non-contiguous slicing, flatten, transpose possible.
Concretely, in this PR, we do the following:
1. Use the `_MeshLayout` to handle all index operations rather use a map to record mesh dims.
2. Removed `flatten_name_to_root_dims`, because now we can directly get layout from a flattened device mesh.
3. Replaced `_get_slice_mesh_dims` with `_get_slice_mesh_layout`.
4. Use the newly added function `check_overlap` to check layout overlap.
5. Use a new function `to_remapping_tensor` to use layout ranks as indices when the mesh tensor is not representable as CuTe. The reason is that layout acts as a backend of mesh tensor bookkeeping (indexing indices), it needs to be used as indices for remap back to the mesh tensor for new DeviceMesh generation and backend init. For example, in the case of 2K to 4K, the underlying layout is (2K, 1) but the actual value of the mesh tensor is [2K, 2K+1, ....,]. While flattening, slicing, we need to remap the layout back to the new mesh tensor so it maps the actual device allocation. For example, in the 2K to 4K case, if the shape is (1K, 1K) with dim_names ("dp", "tp"). Then when slicing "tp", the mesh tensor should be (2K, 2K+1, ..., 3K-1) or (3K, 3K+1, ... 4K-1). not the global ranks generated from the layout. (1K, 1).
Verified that loss curve is very close for DeepSeekV3 on torchtitan, note that exact same match is challenging because even if we run the baseline twice, the loss curve does not exactly match.
<img width="1113" height="490" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/7877b5a4-337e-4ad8-b878-2378f4f0f38d" />
The PR looks big indeed but we don't change any existing behavior of DeviceMesh, so it is a pure refactor.
With this refactoring we also enabled the slicing and flatten of non-contiguous dims of a device mesh which is hard to implement without cute layout.
This is a continue of https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/161106 (original one got messed with EasyCLA)
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/163213
Approved by: https://github.com/lw, https://github.com/fegin
While refactoring the bookkeeping for DeviceMesh while leveraging CuTe layout, we found that we need to have two more util functions. One is to check whether one layout has overlap inside it or not. For example, (2,2):(2:1) has no overlap while (2,2):(2:2) has overlap.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/163367
Approved by: https://github.com/fegin
ghstack dependencies: #163212, #163288, #163928, #163930
We create a wrapper class acting as a layout for device mesh so that we can add new methods more specific to DeviceMesh and keep the core logic of CuTe manipulation inside pycute module. This PR create the main body of the code and then next PR will come with actual implementation and unit test for device mesh layout. (Actual implementation can be found in https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/161016)
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/162414
Approved by: https://github.com/ezyang
ghstack dependencies: #162413, #162534
