[PyTorch] check isValidUnboxed() in the dispatcher#51247
Closed
swolchok wants to merge 4 commits intogh/swolchok/96/basefrom
Closed
[PyTorch] check isValidUnboxed() in the dispatcher#51247swolchok wants to merge 4 commits intogh/swolchok/96/basefrom
swolchok wants to merge 4 commits intogh/swolchok/96/basefrom
Conversation
See code comment for explanation. This measures neutral compared to the previous diff with `perf stat` when running on a benchmark that calls empty in a loop. I think that we should commit it anyway because: 1) I have previously seen it make a difference when applied earlier in the stack. 2) This makes sense both on principle and via inspecting output assembly: we avoid having to touch the boxed kernel at all (usually) and instead use the unboxed kernel for both the validity check in `OperatorEntry::lookup` and the actual `KernelFunction::call`. Differential Revision: [D26113650](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D26113650/) [ghstack-poisoned]
Contributor
💊 CI failures summary and remediationsAs of commit 0f52fcf (more details on the Dr. CI page):
This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI (expand for details).Follow this link to opt-out of these comments for your Pull Requests.Please report bugs/suggestions to the (internal) Dr. CI Users group. |
This was referenced Jan 27, 2021
… the dispatcher" See code comment for explanation. This measures neutral compared to the previous diff with `perf stat` when running on a benchmark that calls empty in a loop. I think that we should commit it anyway because: 1) I have previously seen it make a difference when applied earlier in the stack. 2) This makes sense both on principle and via inspecting output assembly: we avoid having to touch the boxed kernel at all (usually) and instead use the unboxed kernel for both the validity check in `OperatorEntry::lookup` and the actual `KernelFunction::call`. Differential Revision: [D26113650](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D26113650/) [ghstack-poisoned]
swolchok
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 27, 2021
Pull Request resolved: #51247 See code comment for explanation. This measures neutral compared to the previous diff with `perf stat` when running on a benchmark that calls empty in a loop. I think that we should commit it anyway because: 1) I have previously seen it make a difference when applied earlier in the stack. 2) This makes sense both on principle and via inspecting output assembly: we avoid having to touch the boxed kernel at all (usually) and instead use the unboxed kernel for both the validity check in `OperatorEntry::lookup` and the actual `KernelFunction::call`. ghstack-source-id: 120526484 Differential Revision: [D26113650](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D26113650/)
This was referenced Jan 28, 2021
See code comment for explanation. This measures neutral compared to the previous diff with `perf stat` when running on a benchmark that calls empty in a loop. I think that we should commit it anyway because: 1) I have previously seen it make a difference when applied earlier in the stack. 2) This makes sense both on principle and via inspecting output assembly: we avoid having to touch the boxed kernel at all (usually) and instead use the unboxed kernel for both the validity check in `OperatorEntry::lookup` and the actual `KernelFunction::call`. Differential Revision: [D26113650](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D26113650/) [ghstack-poisoned]
This was referenced Jan 29, 2021
See code comment for explanation. This measures neutral compared to the previous diff with `perf stat` when running on a benchmark that calls empty in a loop. I think that we should commit it anyway because: 1) I have previously seen it make a difference when applied earlier in the stack. 2) This makes sense both on principle and via inspecting output assembly: we avoid having to touch the boxed kernel at all (usually) and instead use the unboxed kernel for both the validity check in `OperatorEntry::lookup` and the actual `KernelFunction::call`. Differential Revision: [D26113650](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D26113650/) [ghstack-poisoned]
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## gh/swolchok/96/base #51247 +/- ##
====================================================
Coverage 80.84% 80.85%
====================================================
Files 1938 1938
Lines 211170 211171 +1
====================================================
+ Hits 170725 170738 +13
+ Misses 40445 40433 -12 |
Contributor
|
This pull request has been merged in 9877777. |
laurentdupin
pushed a commit
to laurentdupin/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 24, 2026
Summary: Pull Request resolved: pytorch#51247 See code comment for explanation. This measures neutral compared to the previous diff with `perf stat` when running on a benchmark that calls empty in a loop. I think that we should commit it anyway because: 1) I have previously seen it make a difference when applied earlier in the stack. 2) This makes sense both on principle and via inspecting output assembly: we avoid having to touch the boxed kernel at all (usually) and instead use the unboxed kernel for both the validity check in `OperatorEntry::lookup` and the actual `KernelFunction::call`. ghstack-source-id: 120697497 Test Plan: Aforementioned perf measurement Reviewed By: ezyang Differential Revision: D26113650 fbshipit-source-id: 8448c4ed764d477f63eb7c0f6dd87b1fc0228b73
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 join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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.
Stack from ghstack:
See code comment for explanation.
This measures neutral compared to the previous diff with
perf statwhen running on abenchmark that calls empty in a loop. I think that we should commit it
anyway because:
the stack.
assembly: we avoid having to touch the boxed kernel at all (usually)
and instead use the unboxed kernel for both the validity check in
OperatorEntry::lookupand the actualKernelFunction::call.Differential Revision: D26113650