Add generator parameter to rand*_like functions#136780
Add generator parameter to rand*_like functions#136780moltinginstar wants to merge 3 commits intopytorch:mainfrom
Conversation
🔗 Helpful Links🧪 See artifacts and rendered test results at hud.pytorch.org/pr/136780
Note: Links to docs will display an error until the docs builds have been completed. ✅ No FailuresAs of commit 0e79f18 with merge base 354fe48 ( This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI and updates every 15 minutes. |
Attention! native_functions.yaml was changedIf you are adding a new function or defaulted argument to native_functions.yaml, you cannot use it from pre-existing Python frontend code until our FC window passes (two weeks). Split your PR into two PRs, one which adds the new C++ functionality, and one that makes use of it from Python, and land them two weeks apart. See https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/wiki/PyTorch's-Python-Frontend-Backward-and-Forward-Compatibility-Policy#forwards-compatibility-fc for more info. Caused by: |
|
@pytorchbot label "module: random" |
|
@pytorchbot label "release notes: python_frontend" |
albanD
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for your contribution. That sounds pretty good.
Would you be able to sign the cla and update testing to ensure these are working as expected?
d54c129 to
9f3c848
Compare
|
@pytorchbot rebase |
|
@pytorchbot started a rebase job onto refs/remotes/origin/viable/strict. Check the current status here |
|
Rebase failed due to Command Raised by https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/actions/runs/11551143082 |
|
@pytorchbot rebase |
|
You don't have permissions to rebase this PR since you are a first time contributor. If you think this is a mistake, please contact PyTorch Dev Infra. |
dcb5f85 to
9074172
Compare
…6780)" Summary: Revert D68241649 as it impacts model inference performance Test Plan: TBD Reviewed By: ezyang Differential Revision: D68635488
|
FYI, this is apparently causing a 20% inference regression on an internal model, going to yank this and then figure it out. |
|
@pytorchbot revert -m "internal regression" -c ghfirst |
|
@pytorchbot successfully started a revert job. Check the current status here. |
|
@moltinginstar your PR has been successfully reverted. |
This PR was reopened (likely due to being reverted), so your approval was removed. Please request another review.
|
I'm working with the internal folks to figure out what exactly went wrong |
…)" This reverts commit c7b2f7d. Reverted pytorch#136780 on behalf of https://github.com/izaitsevfb due to internal regression ([comment](pytorch#136780 (comment)))
|
@pytorchbot merge -r |
|
This PR needs to be approved by an authorized maintainer before merge. |
|
@pytorchbot merge -r |
|
@pytorchbot started a rebase job onto refs/remotes/origin/viable/strict. Check the current status here |
|
Successfully rebased |
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 |
Merge failedReason: 3 mandatory check(s) failed. The first few are: Dig deeper by viewing the failures on hud |
|
Looks like this PR hasn't been updated in a while so we're going to go ahead and mark this as |
|
Hey @ezyang! Just wanted to check in on this PR. Looks like the merge failed due to something unrelated to my changes—would it be possible to re-trigger it? Let me know if there’s anything I can do to help move it along. |
|
I’m interested in contributing to PyTorch by implementing the generator parameter for randn_like/rand_like/randint_like . Before I start, I wanted to confirm: 1. Is this still needed? 2. Any preferred implementation approach? 3. Who should review the PR? |
|
Hi, @alexander-t-ho. This issue is solved and codes are merged already. Check #166160 |
Fixes #128786
Fixes #101974
Fixes #27072
cc @pbelevich