Fix usages of TORCH_CHECK/_INTERNAL_ASSERT without condition #71879
Conversation
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
Summary: Two locations of improper macro usage were reported (pytorch#71848), and this diff fixes them. In both cases this is behavior-changing, since the incorrect usages would have passed assertion due interpreting the error string as the condition, and both cases should have been 'assert false'. Test Plan: Run CI Differential Revision: D33800406 fbshipit-source-id: 760cea311776d569b517e1301fe0bfc50e86754d
CI Flow Status⚛️ CI FlowRuleset - Version:
|
🔗 Helpful links
💊 CI failures summary and remediationsAs of commit 0862b66 (more details on the Dr. CI page): 💚 💚 Looks good so far! There are no failures yet. 💚 💚 This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI (expand for details).Please report bugs/suggestions to the (internal) Dr. CI Users group. |
facebook-github-bot
added
oncall: jit
|
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D33800406 |
alanwaketan
reviewed
Jan 26, 2022
| @@ -187,8 +187,7 @@ bool LTCTensorImpl::is_contiguous(c10::MemoryFormat _unused) const { | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| const at::Storage& LTCTensorImpl::storage() const { | |||
| TORCH_CHECK("Lazy tensors do not have storage"); | |||
| return storage_; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we might need to tell clang-tidy about not complaining there is no return statement here. Or you could just leave the return statement intact. The TORCH_CHECK should crash the program already.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it looks like clang-tidy is happy without a return statement. i'm not sure if it's required if there is an assert?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Or my memory could have a glitch. I remembered I added the return statement because of a warning.
alanwaketan
approved these changes
Jan 26, 2022
facebook-github-bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 27, 2022
Summary: Pull Request resolved: #71879 Two locations of improper macro usage were reported (#71848), and this diff fixes them. In both cases this is behavior-changing, since the incorrect usages would have passed assertion due interpreting the error string as the condition, and both cases should have been 'assert false'. Test Plan: Run CI Reviewed By: alanwaketan Differential Revision: D33800406 fbshipit-source-id: dfe3d9a6455e6eb96cb639022f8813a8bd6520c3
cyyever
pushed a commit
to cyyever/pytorch_private
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 3, 2022
Summary: Pull Request resolved: pytorch/pytorch#71879 Two locations of improper macro usage were reported (pytorch/pytorch#71848), and this diff fixes them. In both cases this is behavior-changing, since the incorrect usages would have passed assertion due interpreting the error string as the condition, and both cases should have been 'assert false'. Test Plan: Run CI Reviewed By: alanwaketan Differential Revision: D33800406 fbshipit-source-id: dfe3d9a6455e6eb96cb639022f8813a8bd6520c3 (cherry picked from commit ee551e5)
cyyever
pushed a commit
to cyyever/pytorch_private
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 3, 2022
Summary: Pull Request resolved: pytorch/pytorch#71879 Two locations of improper macro usage were reported (pytorch/pytorch#71848), and this diff fixes them. In both cases this is behavior-changing, since the incorrect usages would have passed assertion due interpreting the error string as the condition, and both cases should have been 'assert false'. Test Plan: Run CI Reviewed By: alanwaketan Differential Revision: D33800406 fbshipit-source-id: dfe3d9a6455e6eb96cb639022f8813a8bd6520c3 (cherry picked from commit ee551e5)
cyyever
pushed a commit
to cyyever/pytorch_private
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 9, 2022
Summary: Pull Request resolved: pytorch/pytorch#71879 Two locations of improper macro usage were reported (pytorch/pytorch#71848), and this diff fixes them. In both cases this is behavior-changing, since the incorrect usages would have passed assertion due interpreting the error string as the condition, and both cases should have been 'assert false'. Test Plan: Run CI Reviewed By: alanwaketan Differential Revision: D33800406 fbshipit-source-id: dfe3d9a6455e6eb96cb639022f8813a8bd6520c3 (cherry picked from commit ee551e5)
cyyever
pushed a commit
to cyyever/pytorch_private
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 9, 2022
Summary: Pull Request resolved: pytorch/pytorch#71879 Two locations of improper macro usage were reported (pytorch/pytorch#71848), and this diff fixes them. In both cases this is behavior-changing, since the incorrect usages would have passed assertion due interpreting the error string as the condition, and both cases should have been 'assert false'. Test Plan: Run CI Reviewed By: alanwaketan Differential Revision: D33800406 fbshipit-source-id: dfe3d9a6455e6eb96cb639022f8813a8bd6520c3 (cherry picked from commit ee551e5)
jjsjann123
pushed a commit
to jjsjann123/nvfuser
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 29, 2022
Summary: Pull Request resolved: pytorch/pytorch#71879 Two locations of improper macro usage were reported (pytorch/pytorch#71848), and this diff fixes them. In both cases this is behavior-changing, since the incorrect usages would have passed assertion due interpreting the error string as the condition, and both cases should have been 'assert false'. Test Plan: Run CI Reviewed By: alanwaketan Differential Revision: D33800406 fbshipit-source-id: dfe3d9a6455e6eb96cb639022f8813a8bd6520c3 (cherry picked from commit ee551e5a16828f273d7694820fa9d9fa1fa52129)
jjsjann123
pushed a commit
to jjsjann123/nvfuser
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 10, 2022
Summary: Pull Request resolved: pytorch/pytorch#71879 Two locations of improper macro usage were reported (pytorch/pytorch#71848), and this diff fixes them. In both cases this is behavior-changing, since the incorrect usages would have passed assertion due interpreting the error string as the condition, and both cases should have been 'assert false'. Test Plan: Run CI Reviewed By: alanwaketan Differential Revision: D33800406 fbshipit-source-id: dfe3d9a6455e6eb96cb639022f8813a8bd6520c3 (cherry picked from commit ee551e5a16828f273d7694820fa9d9fa1fa52129)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Summary: Two locations of improper macro usage were reported (#71848), and this diff fixes them. In both cases this is behavior-changing, since the incorrect usages would have passed assertion due interpreting the error string as the condition, and both cases should have been 'assert false'.
Test Plan: Run CI
Differential Revision: D33800406