Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

views in HF-Bart Self-Attention #2456

Open
kevinstephano opened this issue Feb 14, 2023 · 2 comments
Open

views in HF-Bart Self-Attention #2456

kevinstephano opened this issue Feb 14, 2023 · 2 comments
Assignees

Comments

@kevinstephano
Copy link
Collaborator

🐛 Describe the bug

I have a horizontal fusion situation with reshape that I would like to understand if this can be fused. I think we have a knob to turn this on or a place to switch this. Jie might know. It would be good if this could be 1 kernel.

import torch
from nvfuser import FusionDefinition, DataType

def nvfuser_fusion_id27(fd : FusionDefinition) -> None :
    T0 = fd.define_tensor(symbolic_sizes=[-1, -1, -1], contiguous=[True, True, True], dtype=DataType.Float, is_cpu=False)
    T1 = fd.define_tensor(symbolic_sizes=[-1, -1, -1, -1], contiguous=[True, True, True, True], dtype=DataType.Float, is_cpu=False)
    T2 = fd.define_tensor(symbolic_sizes=[-1, -1, -1], contiguous=[True, True, True], dtype=DataType.Float, is_cpu=False)
    T3 = fd.ops.reshape(T2, original_shape=[8, 1024, 1024], new_shape=[8, 1024, 16, 64])
    T4 = fd.ops.permute(T3, dims=[0, 2, 1, 3])
    T5 = fd.ops.reshape(T0, original_shape=[8, 1024, 1024], new_shape=[8, 1024, 16, 64])
    T6 = fd.ops.permute(T5, dims=[0, 2, 1, 3])
    T7 = fd.ops.reshape(T6, original_shape=[8, 16, 1024, 64], new_shape=[128, 1024, 64])
    T8 = fd.ops.reshape(T1, original_shape=[8, 16, 1024, 64], new_shape=[128, 1024, 64])
    T9 = fd.ops.reshape(T4, original_shape=[8, 16, 1024, 64], new_shape=[128, 1024, 64])
    T10 = fd.ops.permute(T8, dims=[0, 2, 1])
    fd.add_output(T9)
    fd.add_output(T7)
    fd.add_output(T10)

inputs = [
    torch.randn(8, 1024, 1024, device='cuda'),
    torch.randn(8, 1024, 16, 64, device='cuda'),
    torch.randn(8, 1024, 1024, device='cuda'),
]

with FusionDefinition() as fd:
    nvfuser_fusion_id27(fd)

for _ in range(5):
    out = fd.execute(inputs)

Second case looks okay. Could you just double check it is okay with FP16 inputs?

import torch
from nvfuser import FusionDefinition, DataType

def nvfuser_fusion_id21(fd : FusionDefinition) -> None :
    T0 = fd.define_tensor(symbolic_sizes=[-1, -1, -1], contiguous=[True, True, True], dtype=DataType.Float, is_cpu=False)
    T1 = fd.define_tensor(symbolic_sizes=[-1, 1, 1, -1], contiguous=[True, True, True, True], dtype=DataType.Float, is_cpu=False)
    T2 = fd.ops.reshape(T0, original_shape=[128, 1024, 1024], new_shape=[8, 16, 1024, 1024])
    T3 = fd.ops.broadcast_in_dim(T1, output_shape=[8, 16, 1024, 1024], broadcast_dims=[0, 1, 2, 3])
    T4 = fd.ops.add(T2, T3)
    T5 = fd.ops.reshape(T4, original_shape=[8, 16, 1024, 1024], new_shape=[128, 1024, 1024])
    T6 = fd.ops.max(T5, axes=[2], keepdim=False, dtype=DataType.Null)
    T7 = fd.ops.broadcast_in_dim(T6, output_shape=[128, 1024, 1], broadcast_dims=[0, 1])
    T8 = fd.ops.broadcast_in_dim(T7, output_shape=[128, 1024, 1024], broadcast_dims=[0, 1, 2])
    T9 = fd.ops.sub(T5, T8)
    T10 = fd.ops.exp(T9)
    T11 = fd.ops.sum(T10, axes=[2], keepdim=False, dtype=DataType.Null)
    T12 = fd.ops.broadcast_in_dim(T11, output_shape=[128, 1024, 1], broadcast_dims=[0, 1])
    T13 = fd.ops.broadcast_in_dim(T12, output_shape=[128, 1024, 1024], broadcast_dims=[0, 1, 2])
    T14 = fd.ops.div(T10, T13)
    fd.add_output(T14)

inputs = [
    torch.randn(128, 1024, 1024, device='cuda'),
    torch.randn(8, 1, 1, 1024, device='cuda'),
]

with FusionDefinition() as fd:
    nvfuser_fusion_id21(fd)

for _ in range(5):
    out = fd.execute(inputs)

Versions

TOT

@jacobhinkle
Copy link
Collaborator

This is a good test case. I think I know where the heuristic fails. This is probably related to #2455

@jacobhinkle
Copy link
Collaborator

Despite having two reshapes, the second case produces 1 kernel with either float or half inputs. I'm not sure how that is happening since there are two reshapes, so it matches the "comment out C" pattern from #2090 (comment).

In the first case the segmenter is refusing to merge across the three connected components. I'm not sure this is due to reshapes: I don't think this is ever done: see this comment: https://github.com/csarofeen/pytorch/blob/devel/third_party/nvfuser/csrc/fusion_segmenter.cpp#L3275-L3279
For this particular case since the three groups are independent, wouldn't three kernels actually be preferable?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants