[user errors] compulsory case names, allow multiple

[avikchaudhuri]

Stack from ghstack (oldest at bottom):

• -> [user errors] compulsory case names, allow multiple #110878

We want to get to a point where most UserErrors link to exportdb examples. This PR makes passing case names non-optional to make this intent clearer and encourage developers who raise UserErrors to make or point to examples that make fixing such errors more obvious for users.

In addition, sometimes there are multiple examples that are relevant to an error. Thus this PR also enables passing multiple case names.

Retry of #110733 which was reverted due to a landrace.

cc @voznesenskym @penguinwu @EikanWang @jgong5 @Guobing-Chen @XiaobingSuper @zhuhaozhe @blzheng @Xia-Weiwen @wenzhe-nrv @jiayisunx @chenyang78 @aakhundov @kadeng @gmagogsfm @zhxchen17 @tugsbayasgalan

[pytorch-bot]

🔗 Helpful Links

🧪 See artifacts and rendered test results at hud.pytorch.org/pr/110878

• 📄 Preview Python docs built from this PR
• 📄 Preview C++ docs built from this PR
• ❓ Need help or want to give feedback on the CI? Visit the bot commands wiki or our office hours

Note: Links to docs will display an error until the docs builds have been completed.

✅ You can merge normally! (2 Unrelated Failures)

As of commit 171ee55 with merge base ada6550 ():

UNSTABLE - The following jobs failed but were likely due to flakiness present on trunk and has been marked as unstable:

• trunk / linux-focal-rocm5.6-py3.8 / test (default, 1, 3, linux.rocm.gpu, unstable) (gh)
• trunk / linux-focal-rocm5.6-py3.8 / test (default, 3, 3, linux.rocm.gpu, unstable) (gh)

This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI and updates every 15 minutes.

[avikchaudhuri]

@pytorchbot merge

[pytorchmergebot]

Merge failed

Reason: This PR needs a release notes: label
If your changes are user facing and intended to be a part of release notes, please use a label starting with release notes:.

If not, please add the topic: not user facing label.

To add a label, you can comment to pytorchbot, for example
@pytorchbot label "topic: not user facing"

For more information, see
https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/wiki/PyTorch-AutoLabel-Bot#why-categorize-for-release-notes-and-how-does-it-work.

Details for Dev Infra team

Raised by workflow job

[avikchaudhuri]

@pytorchbot merge

[pytorchmergebot]

Merge started

Your 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

Advanced Debugging

Check the merge workflow status
here

[kit1980]

@pytorchbot revert -m "export/test_export.py::TestExport::test_multiple_definitions_same_name_dim - TypeError: UserError.init() missing 1 required positional argument: 'case_names'" -c landrace

[kit1980]

@avikchaudhuri Looks like a landrace with your own PR #110638

[pytorchmergebot]

@pytorchbot successfully started a revert job. Check the current status here.
Questions? Feedback? Please reach out to the PyTorch DevX Team

[pytorchmergebot]

Can't revert PR that was landed via phabricator as D50087148. Please revert by going to the internal diff and clicking Unland.

[kit1980]

I'm unlinking Unpublished diff D50087148 to revert this.

[kit1980]

@pytorchbot revert -m "export/test_export.py::TestExport::test_multiple_definitions_same_name_dim - TypeError: UserError.init() missing 1 required positional argument: 'case_names'" -c landrace

[pytorchmergebot]

@pytorchbot successfully started a revert job. Check the current status here.
Questions? Feedback? Please reach out to the PyTorch DevX Team

[pytorchmergebot]

@avikchaudhuri your PR has been successfully reverted.

[avikchaudhuri]

@kit1980 Just want to confirm whether everything is in sync.

1. Initial attempt at this PR was [user errors] compulsory case names, allow multiple #110733.
2. PR in (1) got reverted by Revert "[user errors] compulsory case names, allow multiple (#110733)" #110783. Yet PR (1) got imported / landed internally as D50090877. This might be because the revert was manual?
3. The current PR was a retry of the original. Now this is reverted. So net effect is that GH doesn't have this change (neither from the retry or the original). So hopefully nothing is broken on GH.
4. However, fbcode still shows the change because of (2). And it also has the change different bounds for same Dim name #110638, which you linked as the causing the land race, and which landed internally as D49965944. So I'm afraid the test is currently broken on fbcode.

This doesn't seem OK, does it?

[kit1980]

@avikchaudhuri #110783 will be imported and landed to fbcode, so everything will be fine.

We're a bit behind on fbcode sync since Friday.