Disallow skipping dynamo #109476
Closed
Disallow skipping dynamo #109476
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
[ghstack-poisoned]
🔗 Helpful Links🧪 See artifacts and rendered test results at hud.pytorch.org/pr/109476
Note: Links to docs will display an error until the docs builds have been completed. ✅ You can merge normally! (1 Unrelated Failure)As of commit 48f9c76 with merge base 6b7b9c7 ( FLAKY - The following job failed but was likely due to flakiness present on trunk:
This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI and updates every 15 minutes. |
tugsbayasgalan
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 18, 2023
ghstack-source-id: f44d59d4f8b99e0e10778e64fa046e1ce910bed0 Pull Request resolved: #109476
|
@tugsbayasgalan has imported this pull request. If you are a Meta employee, you can view this diff on Phabricator. |
Differential Revision: [D49361915](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D49361915) [ghstack-poisoned]
tugsbayasgalan
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 18, 2023
ghstack-source-id: bf93423a38db4818ff50b5eb039b56b02a148b1c Pull Request resolved: #109476
avikchaudhuri
approved these changes
Sep 18, 2023
zhxchen17
approved these changes
Sep 18, 2023
|
@pytorchbot merge |
Merge startedYour change will be merged once all checks pass (ETA 0-4 Hours). Learn more about merging in the wiki. Questions? Feedback? Please reach out to the PyTorch DevX Team |
Merge failedReason: 1 mandatory check(s) failed. The first few are: Dig deeper by viewing the failures on hud |
|
@pytorchbot rebase |
|
@pytorchbot started a rebase job onto refs/remotes/origin/viable/strict. Check the current status here |
Based on William's recent diff on preserving node metadata on retracing, we no longer need to skip dynamo on retracing. This softens our previous restriction of not allowing any new constraints from user side because we can utilize dynamo to analyze through constraints now. As a result, re-export can technically happen with any new constraints. This opens up another problem that "Is it ok to use more loose constraints on the retracing?" If we allow loose constraints, we can technically diverge from eager behaviour because for example we could have eliminated unsafe control flow based on previous assumption. But we can also argue this is ok because we can say we treat the Exported callable to be an independent callable from its' original source code. We can technically ban loose constraints inside export, but my concern is we are breaking abstraction by doing special case checks on ExportedProgram. [ghstack-poisoned]
|
Successfully rebased |
pytorchmergebot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 21, 2023
ghstack-source-id: 8925de6987da6801f7d5cecccf30e24cd192aaaa Pull Request resolved: #109476
Based on William's recent diff on preserving node metadata on retracing, we no longer need to skip dynamo on retracing. This softens our previous restriction of not allowing any new constraints from user side because we can utilize dynamo to analyze through constraints now. As a result, re-export can technically happen with any new constraints. This opens up another problem that "Is it ok to use more loose constraints on the retracing?" If we allow loose constraints, we can technically diverge from eager behaviour because for example we could have eliminated unsafe control flow based on previous assumption. But we can also argue this is ok because we can say we treat the Exported callable to be an independent callable from its' original source code. We can technically ban loose constraints inside export, but my concern is we are breaking abstraction by doing special case checks on ExportedProgram. [ghstack-poisoned]
Based on William's recent diff on preserving node metadata on retracing, we no longer need to skip dynamo on retracing. This softens our previous restriction of not allowing any new constraints from user side because we can utilize dynamo to analyze through constraints now. As a result, re-export can technically happen with any new constraints. This opens up another problem that "Is it ok to use more loose constraints on the retracing?" If we allow loose constraints, we can technically diverge from eager behaviour because for example we could have eliminated unsafe control flow based on previous assumption. But we can also argue this is ok because we can say we treat the Exported callable to be an independent callable from its' original source code. We can technically ban loose constraints inside export, but my concern is we are breaking abstraction by doing special case checks on ExportedProgram. [ghstack-poisoned]
|
@pytorchbot merge |
Merge startedYour change will be merged once all checks pass (ETA 0-4 Hours). Learn more about merging in the wiki. Questions? Feedback? Please reach out to the PyTorch DevX Team |
|
@pytorchbot revert -m "Failing internal CI" -c ghfirst |
|
@pytorchbot successfully started a revert job. Check the current status here. |
|
@tugsbayasgalan your PR has been successfully reverted. |
pytorchmergebot
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 25, 2023
This reverts commit 7bb1d10. Reverted #109476 on behalf of https://github.com/atalman due to Failing internal CI ([comment](#109476 (comment)))
tugsbayasgalan
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 28, 2023
Previous discussion: #109476 cc voznesenskym penguinwu EikanWang jgong5 Guobing-Chen XiaobingSuper zhuhaozhe blzheng Xia-Weiwen wenzhe-nrv jiayisunx chenyang78 aakhundov kadeng [ghstack-poisoned]
tugsbayasgalan
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 26, 2023
Previous discussion: #109476 cc voznesenskym penguinwu EikanWang jgong5 Guobing-Chen XiaobingSuper zhuhaozhe blzheng Xia-Weiwen wenzhe-nrv jiayisunx chenyang78 aakhundov kadeng [ghstack-poisoned]
tugsbayasgalan
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 26, 2023
Previous discussion: #109476 cc voznesenskym penguinwu EikanWang jgong5 Guobing-Chen XiaobingSuper zhuhaozhe blzheng Xia-Weiwen wenzhe-nrv jiayisunx chenyang78 aakhundov kadeng [ghstack-poisoned]
tugsbayasgalan
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 7, 2023
Previous discussion: #109476 cc voznesenskym penguinwu EikanWang jgong5 Guobing-Chen XiaobingSuper zhuhaozhe blzheng wenzhe-nrv jiayisunx chenyang78 aakhundov kadeng avikchaudhuri gmagogsfm zhxchen17 angelayi Xia-Weiwen [ghstack-poisoned]
tugsbayasgalan
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 7, 2023
Previous discussion: #109476 cc voznesenskym penguinwu EikanWang jgong5 Guobing-Chen XiaobingSuper zhuhaozhe blzheng wenzhe-nrv jiayisunx chenyang78 aakhundov kadeng avikchaudhuri gmagogsfm zhxchen17 angelayi Xia-Weiwen [ghstack-poisoned]
tugsbayasgalan
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 7, 2023
Previous discussion: #109476 In this PR, I made following additions to the original PR: 1) Unlifted graph module now runs the runtime assertions in its' forward call. 2) When we retrace, we make sure we run the assertions to make sure user is tracing the module with correct inputs with respect to the assumptions we made during first tracing. The way I do is that I create new graph module type with modified call method. And the runtime assertions happen under torchdynamo.disable so that it is just run in eager directly. The reason is we don't this to be traced part of the graph. 3) Both ep.module and capture_pre_autograd now returns _UnliftedGraphModule. cc voznesenskym penguinwu EikanWang jgong5 Guobing-Chen XiaobingSuper zhuhaozhe blzheng wenzhe-nrv jiayisunx chenyang78 aakhundov kadeng avikchaudhuri gmagogsfm zhxchen17 angelayi Xia-Weiwen Differential Revision: [D51078056](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D51078056) [ghstack-poisoned]
tugsbayasgalan
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 7, 2023
Previous discussion: #109476 In this PR, I made following additions to the original PR: 1) Unlifted graph module now runs the runtime assertions in its' forward call. 2) When we retrace, we make sure we run the assertions to make sure user is tracing the module with correct inputs with respect to the assumptions we made during first tracing. The way I do is that I create new graph module type with modified call method. And the runtime assertions happen under torchdynamo.disable so that it is just run in eager directly. The reason is we don't this to be traced part of the graph. 3) Both ep.module and capture_pre_autograd now returns _UnliftedGraphModule. cc voznesenskym penguinwu EikanWang jgong5 Guobing-Chen XiaobingSuper zhuhaozhe blzheng wenzhe-nrv jiayisunx chenyang78 aakhundov kadeng avikchaudhuri gmagogsfm zhxchen17 angelayi Xia-Weiwen Differential Revision: [D51078056](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D51078056) [ghstack-poisoned]
tugsbayasgalan
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 12, 2023
Previous discussion: #109476 In this PR, I made following additions to the original PR: 1) Unlifted graph module now runs the runtime assertions in its' forward call. 2) When we retrace, we make sure we run the assertions to make sure user is tracing the module with correct inputs with respect to the assumptions we made during first tracing. The way I do is that I create new graph module type with modified call method. And the runtime assertions happen under torchdynamo.disable so that it is just run in eager directly. The reason is we don't this to be traced part of the graph. 3) Both ep.module and capture_pre_autograd now returns _UnliftedGraphModule. cc voznesenskym penguinwu EikanWang jgong5 Guobing-Chen XiaobingSuper zhuhaozhe blzheng wenzhe-nrv jiayisunx chenyang78 aakhundov kadeng avikchaudhuri gmagogsfm zhxchen17 angelayi Xia-Weiwen Differential Revision: [D51078056](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D51078056) [ghstack-poisoned]
tugsbayasgalan
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 12, 2023
Previous discussion: #109476 In this PR, I made following additions to the original PR: 1) Unlifted graph module now runs the runtime assertions in its' forward call. 2) When we retrace, we make sure we run the assertions to make sure user is tracing the module with correct inputs with respect to the assumptions we made during first tracing. The way I do is that I create new graph module type with modified call method. And the runtime assertions happen under torchdynamo.disable so that it is just run in eager directly. The reason is we don't this to be traced part of the graph. 3) Both ep.module and capture_pre_autograd now returns _UnliftedGraphModule. cc voznesenskym penguinwu EikanWang jgong5 Guobing-Chen XiaobingSuper zhuhaozhe blzheng wenzhe-nrv jiayisunx chenyang78 aakhundov kadeng avikchaudhuri gmagogsfm zhxchen17 angelayi Xia-Weiwen Differential Revision: [D51078056](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D51078056) [ghstack-poisoned]
tugsbayasgalan
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 12, 2023
Previous discussion: #109476 In this PR, I made following additions to the original PR: 1) Unlifted graph module now runs the runtime assertions in its' forward call. 2) When we retrace, we make sure we run the assertions to make sure user is tracing the module with correct inputs with respect to the assumptions we made during first tracing. The way I do is that I create new graph module type with modified call method. And the runtime assertions happen under torchdynamo.disable so that it is just run in eager directly. The reason is we don't this to be traced part of the graph. 3) Both ep.module and capture_pre_autograd now returns _UnliftedGraphModule. cc voznesenskym penguinwu EikanWang jgong5 Guobing-Chen XiaobingSuper zhuhaozhe blzheng wenzhe-nrv jiayisunx chenyang78 aakhundov kadeng avikchaudhuri gmagogsfm zhxchen17 angelayi Xia-Weiwen Differential Revision: [D51078056](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D51078056) [ghstack-poisoned]
tugsbayasgalan
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 12, 2023
Previous discussion: #109476 In this PR, I made following additions to the original PR: 1) Unlifted graph module now runs the runtime assertions in its' forward call. 2) When we retrace, we make sure we run the assertions to make sure user is tracing the module with correct inputs with respect to the assumptions we made during first tracing. The way I do is that I create new graph module type with modified call method. And the runtime assertions happen under torchdynamo.disable so that it is just run in eager directly. The reason is we don't this to be traced part of the graph. 3) Both ep.module and capture_pre_autograd now returns _UnliftedGraphModule. cc voznesenskym penguinwu EikanWang jgong5 Guobing-Chen XiaobingSuper zhuhaozhe blzheng wenzhe-nrv jiayisunx chenyang78 aakhundov kadeng avikchaudhuri gmagogsfm zhxchen17 angelayi Xia-Weiwen Differential Revision: [D51078056](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D51078056) [ghstack-poisoned]
pytorchmergebot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 14, 2023
Previous discussion: #109476 In this PR, I made following additions to the original PR: 1) Unlifted graph module now runs the runtime assertions in its' forward call. 2) When we retrace, we make sure we run the assertions to make sure user is tracing the module with correct inputs with respect to the assumptions we made during first tracing. The way I do is that I create new graph module type with modified call method. And the runtime assertions happen under torchdynamo.disable so that it is just run in eager directly. The reason is we don't this to be traced part of the graph. 3) Both ep.module and capture_pre_autograd now returns _UnliftedGraphModule. Differential Revision: [D51078056](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D51078056) Pull Request resolved: #110222 Approved by: https://github.com/zhxchen17
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Stack from ghstack (oldest at bottom):
Based on William's recent diff on preserving node metadata on retracing, we no longer need to skip dynamo on retracing. This softens our previous restriction of not allowing any new constraints from user side because we can utilize dynamo to analyze through constraints now. As a result, re-export can technically happen with any new constraints. This opens up another problem that "Is it ok to use more loose constraints on the retracing?" If we allow loose constraints, we can technically diverge from eager behaviour because for example we could have eliminated unsafe control flow based on previous assumption. But we can also argue this is ok because we can say we treat the Exported callable to be an independent callable from its' original source code.
We can technically ban loose constraints inside export, but my concern is we are breaking abstraction by doing special case checks on ExportedProgram.