-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 21.4k
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
[quant] Explictly set default quantized engine instead of relying on the order of supported_qengines #89804
Conversation
…the order of supported_qengines Summary: Fixes: #86404 Test Plan: ossci + sandcastle Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: [ghstack-poisoned]
🔗 Helpful Links🧪 See artifacts and rendered test results at hud.pytorch.org/pr/89804
Note: Links to docs will display an error until the docs builds have been completed. ❌ 2 FailuresAs of commit 7ad128a: The following jobs have failed:
This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI and updates every 15 minutes. |
…relying on the order of supported_qengines" Summary: Fixes: #86404 Test Plan: ossci + sandcastle Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: [ghstack-poisoned]
…relying on the order of supported_qengines" Summary: Fixes: #86404 Test Plan: ossci + sandcastle Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: [ghstack-poisoned]
…relying on the order of supported_qengines" Summary: Fixes: #86404 Test Plan: ossci + sandcastle Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: [ghstack-poisoned]
…relying on the order of supported_qengines" Summary: Fixes: #86404 Test Plan: ossci + sandcastle Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: [ghstack-poisoned]
…relying on the order of supported_qengines" Summary: Fixes: #86404 Test Plan: ossci + sandcastle Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: [ghstack-poisoned]
} | ||
#endif | ||
return qengine; | ||
}(); |
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.
What's the purpose of using a lambda here? I feel it would be easier to read without it.
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.
Also, is it possible to have return statements inside ifdef
blocks? If so that would be cleaner I think
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 is to make sure the function is only run once during first call I think
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.
how to return in ifdef
? are you talking about adding a return after each ifdef
block?
@jerryzh168 has imported this pull request. If you are a Meta employee, you can view this diff on Phabricator. |
@pytorchbot merge (Initiating merge automatically since Phabricator Diff has merged) |
Merge startedYour 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 |
@pytorchbot revert -m "breaking tests https://hud.pytorch.org/pytorch/pytorch/commit/607ff6f4c10914a2a46bab90577cd083a6b3d46d https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/actions/runs/3596841274/jobs/6058297637 trunk label didnt kick off workflows fast enough" -c nosignal |
@pytorchbot successfully started a revert job. Check the current status here. |
@jerryzh168 your PR has been successfully reverted. |
…ying on the order of supported_qengines (#89804)" This reverts commit 607ff6f. Reverted #89804 on behalf of https://github.com/clee2000 due to breaking tests https://hud.pytorch.org/pytorch/pytorch/commit/607ff6f4c10914a2a46bab90577cd083a6b3d46d https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/actions/runs/3596841274/jobs/6058297637 trunk label didnt kick off workflows fast enough
I remember checked the CI before actually, should this error block landing? |
…ying on the order of supported_qengines (#89804) (#90036) Summary: Fixes: #86404 Test Plan: ossci + sandcastle Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: Pull Request resolved: #90036 Approved by: https://github.com/andrewor14
…the order of supported_qengines (pytorch#89804) Summary: Fixes: pytorch#86404 Test Plan: ossci + sandcastle Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: Differential Revision: [D41635738](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D41635738) Pull Request resolved: pytorch#89804 Approved by: https://github.com/andrewor14
…ying on the order of supported_qengines (pytorch#89804)" This reverts commit 607ff6f. Reverted pytorch#89804 on behalf of https://github.com/clee2000 due to breaking tests https://hud.pytorch.org/pytorch/pytorch/commit/607ff6f4c10914a2a46bab90577cd083a6b3d46d https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/actions/runs/3596841274/jobs/6058297637 trunk label didnt kick off workflows fast enough
…ying on the order of supported_qengines (pytorch#89804) (pytorch#90036) Summary: Fixes: pytorch#86404 Test Plan: ossci + sandcastle Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: Pull Request resolved: pytorch#90036 Approved by: https://github.com/andrewor14
Stack from ghstack (oldest at bottom):
Summary:
Fixes: #86404
Test Plan:
ossci + sandcastle
Reviewers:
Subscribers:
Tasks:
Tags:
Differential Revision: D41635738