New doc for the memory planning inspection util function #5430
Conversation
🔗 Helpful Links🧪 See artifacts and rendered test results at hud.pytorch.org/pr/pytorch/executorch/5430
Note: Links to docs will display an error until the docs builds have been completed. ❗ 1 Active SEVsThere are 1 currently active SEVs. If your PR is affected, please view them below: ✅ No FailuresAs of commit 29d7b63 with merge base 3bedd8b ( This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI and updates every 15 minutes. |
facebook-github-bot
added
the
CLA Signed
|
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D62796663 |
|
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D62796663 |
Olivia-liu
force-pushed
the
export-D62796663
branch
from
4789a30 to
ed6f206
Compare
|
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D62796663 |
Summary: Pull Request resolved: pytorch#5430 ## Why The memory planning inspection tool `generate_memory_trace()` has proved to be useful by users, and we will be presenting it in the executorch debugging and profiling lightning talk at PTC, so it's important to have documentation for it which users can refer to. ## What A new page in the official doc that talks about how to use the memory planning inspection tool `generate_memory_trace()`. Differential Revision: D62796663
Olivia-liu
force-pushed
the
export-D62796663
branch
from
ed6f206 to
03bb53c
Compare
|
|
||
| ## Debugging Tool | ||
|
|
||
| Please refer to [Memory Planing Inspection](./memory-planning-inspection.md) for a tool to inspect the result of memory planning. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Missing 'n' in Planning (Planing)
| Please refer to [Memory Planing Inspection](./memory-planning-inspection.md) for a tool to inspect the result of memory planning. | |
| Please refer to [Memory Planning Inspection](./memory-planning-inspection.md) for a tool to inspect the result of memory planning. |
docs/source/devtools-overview.md
Outdated
| - **Delegate Integration** - Surfacing performance details from delegate backends | ||
| - Link back delegate operator execution to the nodes they represent in the edge dialect graph (and subsequently linking back to source code and module hierarchy) | ||
| - **Debugging** - Intermediate outputs and output quality analysis | ||
| - **Memory Inspection** - Understand memory allocation |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"memory inspection" implies that you're looking at the contents of memory, but that's not what's happening here. "Memory Allocation Tracking" or "Memory Allocation Insights", maybe.
And please expand this a bit to describe which allocations it covers. "Runtime Memory Allocation ...", for example, with a description that talks about debugging memory allocation behavior at runtime.
|
|
||
|  | ||
|
|
||
| Note that since we are repurposing the Chrome trace tool, the horizontal axis, despite being labeled in seconds (s), actually represents megabytes (MB). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
And the vertical axis, despite being labeled as process IDs, represents time.
Though "time" isn't exactly right; it's more like "iterations through the memory planning process"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would be more natural for the X axis label to use the plural "in megabytes"
Olivia-liu
force-pushed
the
export-D62796663
branch
from
03bb53c to
a211319
Compare
|
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D62796663 |
Summary: Pull Request resolved: pytorch#5430 ## Why The memory planning inspection tool `generate_memory_trace()` has proved to be useful by users, and we will be presenting it in the executorch debugging and profiling lightning talk at PTC, so it's important to have documentation for it which users can refer to. ## What A new page in the official doc that talks about how to use the memory planning inspection tool `generate_memory_trace()`. Differential Revision: D62796663
Summary: Pull Request resolved: pytorch#5430 ## Why The memory planning inspection tool `generate_memory_trace()` has proved to be useful by users, and we will be presenting it in the executorch debugging and profiling lightning talk at PTC, so it's important to have documentation for it which users can refer to. ## What A new page in the official doc that talks about how to use the memory planning inspection tool `generate_memory_trace()`. Differential Revision: D62796663
Olivia-liu
force-pushed
the
export-D62796663
branch
from
a211319 to
29d7b63
Compare
|
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D62796663 |
|
This pull request has been merged in 7127ea9. |
|
@pytorchbot cherry-pick --onto release/0.4 -c docs |
Summary: Pull Request resolved: #5430 ## Why The memory planning inspection tool `generate_memory_trace()` has proved to be useful by users, and we will be presenting it in the executorch debugging and profiling lightning talk at PTC, so it's important to have documentation for it which users can refer to. ## What A new page in the official doc that talks about how to use the memory planning inspection tool `generate_memory_trace()`. Reviewed By: dbort Differential Revision: D62796663 fbshipit-source-id: 6c868590d805e9f21bccc7023131eb814b96e5b1 (cherry picked from commit 7127ea9)
Cherry picking #5430The cherry pick PR is at #5724 The following tracker issues are updated: Details for Dev Infra teamRaised by workflow job |
New doc for the memory planning inspection util function (#5430) Summary: Pull Request resolved: #5430 ## Why The memory planning inspection tool `generate_memory_trace()` has proved to be useful by users, and we will be presenting it in the executorch debugging and profiling lightning talk at PTC, so it's important to have documentation for it which users can refer to. ## What A new page in the official doc that talks about how to use the memory planning inspection tool `generate_memory_trace()`. Reviewed By: dbort Differential Revision: D62796663 fbshipit-source-id: 6c868590d805e9f21bccc7023131eb814b96e5b1 (cherry picked from commit 7127ea9) Co-authored-by: Olivia Liu <olivialpx@meta.com>
4 participants
Differential Revision: D62796663