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
[RPC] Add option to make rref.get_type not block. #50977
Closed
Closed
Changes from 7 commits
Commits
Show all changes
9 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
5c5e878
[RPC] Add option to make rref.get_type not block.
rohan-varma 16f6c18
Update on "[RPC] Add option to make rref.get_type not block."
rohan-varma d41dca4
Update on "[RPC] Add option to make rref.get_type not block."
rohan-varma 7f394b8
Update on "[RPC] Add option to make rref.get_type not block."
rohan-varma fecaf5f
Update on "[RPC] Add option to make rref.get_type not block."
rohan-varma fb22b59
Update on "[RPC] Add option to make rref.get_type not block."
rohan-varma 1f55da4
Update on "[RPC] Add option to make rref.get_type not block."
rohan-varma f32a6f9
Update on "[RPC] Add option to make rref.get_type not block."
rohan-varma 77db3d0
Update on "[RPC] Add option to make rref.get_type not block."
rohan-varma File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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.
if this returns a future, do we need to annotate this function with an
@rpc.functions.async_execution
decorator?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.
I recall Future is not picklable, and we didn't plan to make Future picklable, as communicating a future to a remote process does not seem reasonable? E.g., if the future is not completed yet, do we need to update both local and remote futures when the local one is marked as completed?
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.
This won't return a future when called remotely, as the only remote call is from the below
_rref_typeof_on_user
, and we call that with blocking (just need to get the type in that case).I didn't decorate it with rpc.functions.async_execution for that reason, because its always ran synchronously when called over RPC. So I guess this means picklability of Future isn't a concern?
I think this could potentially cause issues later if this function is ran over RPC with
blocking=False
, but since its private I'm assuming use cases will be like the ones below.