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
[PyTorch] Devirtualize TensorImpl::dim() with macro #49770
Conversation
Seems like the performance cost of making this commonly-called method virtual isn't worth having use of undefined tensors crash a bit earlier (they'll still fail to dispatch). Differential Revision: [D25687465](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25687465/) **NOTE FOR REVIEWERS**: This PR has internal Facebook specific changes or comments, please review them on [Phabricator](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25687465/)! [ghstack-poisoned]
💊 CI failures summary and remediationsAs of commit d7e578f (more details on the Dr. CI page):
🕵️ 1 new failure recognized by patternsThe following CI failures do not appear to be due to upstream breakages: pytorch_libtorch_linux_xenial_cuda11_1_cudnn8_py3_gcc7_build (1/1)Step: "Build" (full log | diagnosis details | 🔁 rerun)
|
Seems like the performance cost of making this commonly-called method virtual isn't worth having use of undefined tensors crash a bit earlier (they'll still fail to dispatch). Differential Revision: [D25687465](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25687465/) **NOTE FOR REVIEWERS**: This PR has internal Facebook specific changes or comments, please review them on [Phabricator](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25687465/)! ghstack-source-id: 119068428 Pull Request resolved: #49770
Seems like the performance cost of making this commonly-called method virtual isn't worth having use of undefined tensors crash a bit earlier (they'll still fail to dispatch). Differential Revision: [D25687465](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25687465/) **NOTE FOR REVIEWERS**: This PR has internal Facebook specific changes or comments, please review them on [Phabricator](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25687465/)! [ghstack-poisoned]
Pull Request resolved: #49770 Seems like the performance cost of making this commonly-called method virtual isn't worth having use of undefined tensors crash a bit earlier (they'll still fail to dispatch). ghstack-source-id: 119411550 Differential Revision: [D25687465](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25687465/) **NOTE FOR REVIEWERS**: This PR has internal Facebook specific changes or comments, please review them on [Phabricator](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25687465/)!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
OK. This change is a little hard to understand from the perspective of an OSS only user, since there is no point in the codebase where we ever actually set the macro. A Note explaining the situation would go a long way to explaining to people what's going on. (It's also worth pointing out XLA is the blocker for unconditionally removing the macro entirely)
Seems like the performance cost of making this commonly-called method virtual isn't worth having use of undefined tensors crash a bit earlier (they'll still fail to dispatch). Differential Revision: [D25687465](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25687465/) **NOTE FOR REVIEWERS**: This PR has internal Facebook specific changes or comments, please review them on [Phabricator](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25687465/)! [ghstack-poisoned]
Pull Request resolved: #49770 Seems like the performance cost of making this commonly-called method virtual isn't worth having use of undefined tensors crash a bit earlier (they'll still fail to dispatch). ghstack-source-id: 119462149 Differential Revision: [D25687465](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25687465/) **NOTE FOR REVIEWERS**: This PR has internal Facebook specific changes or comments, please review them on [Phabricator](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25687465/)!
Added to the PR at the bottom of the stack that adds |
Seems like the performance cost of making this commonly-called method virtual isn't worth having use of undefined tensors crash a bit earlier (they'll still fail to dispatch). Differential Revision: [D25687465](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25687465/) **NOTE FOR REVIEWERS**: This PR has internal Facebook specific changes or comments, please review them on [Phabricator](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25687465/)! [ghstack-poisoned]
Pull Request resolved: #49770 Seems like the performance cost of making this commonly-called method virtual isn't worth having use of undefined tensors crash a bit earlier (they'll still fail to dispatch). ghstack-source-id: 119477211 Differential Revision: [D25687465](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25687465/) **NOTE FOR REVIEWERS**: This PR has internal Facebook specific changes or comments, please review them on [Phabricator](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25687465/)!
Seems like the performance cost of making this commonly-called method virtual isn't worth having use of undefined tensors crash a bit earlier (they'll still fail to dispatch). Differential Revision: [D25687465](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25687465/) **NOTE FOR REVIEWERS**: This PR has internal Facebook specific changes or comments, please review them on [Phabricator](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25687465/)! [ghstack-poisoned]
This pull request has been merged in 4de6b27. |
This pull request has been reverted by c215ffb. |
Summary: Pull Request resolved: pytorch#49770 Seems like the performance cost of making this commonly-called method virtual isn't worth having use of undefined tensors crash a bit earlier (they'll still fail to dispatch). ghstack-source-id: 119528065 Test Plan: framework overhead benchmarks Reviewed By: ezyang Differential Revision: D25687465 fbshipit-source-id: 89aabce165a594be401979c04236114a6f527b59
Stack from ghstack:
Seems like the performance cost of making this commonly-called method virtual isn't worth having use of undefined tensors crash a bit earlier (they'll still fail to dispatch).
Differential Revision: D25687465
NOTE FOR REVIEWERS: This PR has internal Facebook specific changes or comments, please review them on Phabricator!