This repository was archived by the owner on Aug 21, 2025. It is now read-only.
make sync logic more accurate for functionalization#795
Merged
Conversation
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 11, 2022
…iews of same base" welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 11, 2022
welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 13, 2022
…iews of same base" welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 13, 2022
welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
zou3519
approved these changes
May 16, 2022
Contributor
zou3519
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure. Is it possible to add a test?
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 18, 2022
…iews of same base" welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 18, 2022
welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 18, 2022
…iews of same base" welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 18, 2022
welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 18, 2022
…iews of same base" welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 18, 2022
welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 18, 2022
…iews of same base" welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 18, 2022
welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 19, 2022
…iews of same base" welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 19, 2022
welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 19, 2022
…iews of same base" welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 19, 2022
welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 19, 2022
…iews of same base" welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 19, 2022
welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 20, 2022
…iews of same base" welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 20, 2022
welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 20, 2022
…iews of same base" welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 20, 2022
welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 23, 2022
…iews of same base" welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 23, 2022
welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 24, 2022
…iews of same base" welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 24, 2022
welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 24, 2022
…iews of same base" welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
added a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
May 24, 2022
welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because `functionalize()` was sometimes emit an unnecessary `view_copy`, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795 [ghstack-poisoned]
Contributor
|
@bdhirsh can we merge this? I'm not sure if anything has changed |
Contributor
Author
|
yes, we should merge this. I'll rebase and re-run tests for sanity |
7c49c96 to
077d5d5
Compare
Contributor
Author
|
checks pass so I"ll merge :) |
zou3519
pushed a commit
to zou3519/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 20, 2022
bigfootjon
pushed a commit
to pytorch/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 21, 2022
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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.
Richard left a comment here a while ago that I forgot about: #235 (comment)
I had a crappy fix for ensuring that
functionalize()doesn't emit extra unnecessaryview_copyops that was actually wrong in some cases, but this should really fix it