Removes MemPoolContext from custom user mempools. The ground truth for which pool should be used is in graph_pools active pool, and MemPoolContext just introduced an opportunity for the pool pointed to by MemPoolContext and active pool in graph_pools to go out of sync (see all the asserts in the code to make sure that happens, and yet it still could happen in a multithread scenario, see my recent PRs (#153990).
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/154042
Approved by: https://github.com/albanD, https://github.com/syed-ahmed
- Move community and language binding links to the horizontal bar
- Add an intro to the community page.
- Fix the link in the ogp_image
- Fix the link in the version switcher
- Clean up unneeded links
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/153090
Approved by: https://github.com/albanD
This is an initial attempt to provide some statistics for the pinned host memory allocations flowing through CachingHostAllocator. Many times in the past we have had inexplicable slowdowns that would be much easier to diagnose if we had some host memory characteristics.
This change tries very hard not to disrupt the initial design of the allocator, and it uses existing locking mechanism, whenever possible, to gather statistics "for free". Only deviation from that is on the "slow path" where we incur CUDA calls anyway, so taking a short lock is not going to hurt the performance much, especially in the steady state where most allocations will come from cache.
As mentioned before, this is the first PR, to introduce the concept and to see if it fits the right paradigm. We can always add more later.
Metrics that would require more involved changes to the code base and locks, like requested memory, have been punted for now. I also tried to reuse the Stat structure used in CUDA caching allocator, in order to maintain symmetry.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/147660
Approved by: https://github.com/ngimel
This is an initial attempt to provide some statistics for the pinned host memory allocations flowing through CachingHostAllocator. Many times in the past we have had inexplicable slowdowns that would be much easier to diagnose if we had some host memory characteristics.
This change tries very hard not to disrupt the initial design of the allocator, and it uses existing locking mechanism, whenever possible, to gather statistics "for free". Only deviation from that is on the "slow path" where we incur CUDA calls anyway, so taking a short lock is not going to hurt the performance much, especially in the steady state where most allocations will come from cache.
As mentioned before, this is the first PR, to introduce the concept and to see if it fits the right paradigm. We can always add more later.
Metrics that would require more involved changes to the code base and locks, like requested memory, have been punted for now. I also tried to reuse the Stat structure used in CUDA caching allocator, in order to maintain symmetry.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/147660
Approved by: https://github.com/ngimel
Certain `cpp_wrapper`-enabled tests were OOM-ing in the CI pipeline, with error messages suggesting that sufficient memory was accessible. This ultimately resulted from an internal memory limitation that was not queryable in the API. This PR adds querying for that limit.
Additionally, the failing tests had incorrect memory availability checks, and are updated with measured memory requirements.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/140620
Approved by: https://github.com/malfet, https://github.com/eqy
ghstack dependencies: #141367
So I found this utility by accident, trying to find how many html files we have in the repo so I could convert them to markdown
Turns out we package some html and js files in pytorch to visualize torchscript models. This seems kinda strange, probably shouldn't be in core, I removed the tests I could find. Maybe some internal tests will break but considering torchscript is being superseded might make sense to do this
Last time there was a meaningful update to the test for this file was about 2 years ago by @digantdesai since then it's a bunch of routine upgrades
It seems like this package is unused https://github.com/search?type=code&auto_enroll=true&q=torch.utils.model_dump&p=1 I skimmed through 5 pages of these and the only time this shows up in code search is when someone is either cloning pytorch or checking in their venv into github
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/141540
Approved by: https://github.com/malfet
# Motivation
This PR add `XPUInductorQuantizer`, which would defined the recipe of int8 quantization at XPU backend.
# Detailed
The `XPUInductorQuantizer` is class derived from `X86InductorQuantizer` as both quantizer would take the advantage of highly optimized operators in oneDNN library(qconv, qlinear, qconv/qlinear fusion).
We share the same recipe as `X86InductorQuantizer`, so we would have same `annotate_xxxx` methods. So, in ideal situation, the `XPUInductorQuantizer` would have no class body as all implementation can inherit from base class.
In this PR, we override the `annotate_xxx` method for operators that has NOT be implemented. All operators XPU backend does not implement would be fallbacked to fp32 implementation as the node in graph is a `dq-op-q` pairs. This would help provide good OOB usability for XPU backend. On the other hand, the implemented operators would uses `annotate_op` implemented in base class and could be lowered successfully.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/139578
Approved by: https://github.com/EikanWang, https://github.com/leslie-fang-intel, https://github.com/CuiYifeng, https://github.com/jerryzh168
ghstack dependencies: #133080
This PR refactors some ref-counting functionality out of `beginAllocateToPool` and `releasePool`. The ref-counting logic is then used in construction and destruction of `torch.cuda.MemPool`.
The `use_count` variable in the CUDACachingAllocator is essentially a refcount of how many context managers are using the pool. Since we are now lifting up the MemPool abstraction to the user, the MemPool object itself now needs to hold a an extra reference as well.
Part of https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/124807.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/133600
Approved by: https://github.com/eqy, https://github.com/ezyang
Moving DTensor to be in the public namespace, to formally add the
documentation page that includes all the public APIs. This includes:
* many path renames and path import fixes
* a dedicated doc page without too much content yet (adding in the next
PRs)
* To preserve the BC for users still using the `torch.distributed._tensor`,
I added a shim script to redirect old path calls to the new module
The BC preserving is evidented by the fact that all DTensor tests are still
working without changing the public imports. So it's safe to land the
changes
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/133113
Approved by: https://github.com/XilunWu
ghstack dependencies: #133305, #133306
Instead of having a separate context variable for SymDispatchMode, we
now simply delegate to the current active proxy tensor mode when we
need to trace a SymInt. We maintain a separate `__sym_dispatch__` magic
method as the calling convention is different than `__torch_dispatch__`.
Consolidating the modes in this ways means that we can consistently
disable both of these modes in tandem simply by removing the mode
from the proxy mode infra slot.
Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@meta.com>
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/132674
Approved by: https://github.com/zou3519, https://github.com/bdhirsh
Instead of having a separate context variable for SymDispatchMode, we
now simply delegate to the current active proxy tensor mode when we
need to trace a SymInt. We maintain a separate `__sym_dispatch__` magic
method as the calling convention is different than `__torch_dispatch__`.
Consolidating the modes in this ways means that we can consistently
disable both of these modes in tandem simply by removing the mode
from the proxy mode infra slot.
Signed-off-by: Edward Z. Yang <ezyang@meta.com>
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/132674
Approved by: https://github.com/zou3519, https://github.com/bdhirsh
When caching is enabled, an internal model fails with
```
assert_size_stride(bmm_9, (17, s0, 512), (54784, 512, 1))
AssertionError: expected size 17==17, stride 57344==54784 at dim=0
```
looking at this model, the exact problem is when the cache is hit on the forward graph, the generated code for backward fails since the strides of the outputs of forward, passed to backward as inputs, are not what we expected.
This PR changes the evaluation logic so that we defer evaluation of output stride exprs to load path as opposed to eagerly doing it on save path.
I have not been able to come up with a unit test repro for this problem.
Differential Revision: [D58796503](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D58796503)
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/128997
Approved by: https://github.com/ezyang
Summary:
This makes barrier and rank operations linear instead of quadratic with the number of workers. This drastically improves performance for rendezvous when running with over 1000 hosts.
This uses 2 approaches for different areas:
* local rank assignment: each worker does 1 set and 1 get, local ranks are assigned on the rank 0 host in a O(n) operation which reduces total store operations to be linear with number of workers.
* exit_barrier: use a counter and a final flag so each worker has to do max 1 set, 1 get and 1 add.
At 4000 hosts we see torchelastic be able to run in as little as 10 seconds down from 373 seconds.
Test Plan:
This is testing using many small tests running on a remote cluster.
{D56549942}
```
torchx run --scheduler mast -- --image=torchelastic_benchmark --j=4000x1
```
Differential Revision: D56605193
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/124982
Approved by: https://github.com/kiukchung, https://github.com/kurman
Loss parallel is the last piece of sequence parallelism to enable. It enables efficient distributed cross entropy computation when the input is sharded on the class dimension (in a classification problem with many classes). The implementation is via a context manager `loss_parallel`, after enabling which users can directly use `torch.nn.functional.cross_entropy` or `torch.nn.CrossEntropyLoss` without modifying other parts of their code.
Here are the underlying rationales why we are going through these op replacements:
1. `nn.functional.cross_entropy` is the common method that OSS user is using for things like transformer training, to avoid changing user code, we want user to still use this function for loss calculation if they are already using it.
2. `nn.functional.cross_entropy` boils down into `aten.log_softmax` and `aten.nll_loss_foward/backward`, and DTensor now supports those ops already (#117723#119255#118917#119256). They are doing computation with input *replicated* on the class dimension.
3. However when the input of this loss calculation is **sharded on the class dimension**, to run sharded computation efficiently, we need to run both `aten.log_softmax` and `aten.nll_loss_foward` with multiple all-reduce collectives **in the middle of** those aten ops. This is not possible if we are just overriding these two ops, so we need to have some way to **decompose** these two ops into smaller ops to have collectives run in the middle of these two ops.
4. We explored the existing decompositions (#118950). It seems working, except that `log_softmax_backward` and `nll_loss_backward` combined together in aten are implemented in a inefficient way, which would trigger an additional expensive collective. Recently some user also reported similar issues https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/119261.
5. Therefore, currently we are doing our own decomposition inside a context manager for sequence parallelism specifically. Once we have a better decomposition in core, we can possibly take that instead of reinventing the wheels here.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/119877
Approved by: https://github.com/wanchaol
