Conversation
Added OpInfos for:
- F.adapative_avg_pool{1, 3}d
- F.avg_pool{1, 3}d
The 2d variants already had OpInfos.
Test Plan:
- run tests
[ghstack-poisoned]
🔗 Helpful links
💊 CI failures summary and remediationsAs of commit aaa8dee (more details on the Dr. CI page):
1 failure not recognized by patterns:
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. |
Added OpInfos for:
- F.adapative_avg_pool{1, 3}d
- F.avg_pool{1, 3}d
The 2d variants already had OpInfos.
Test Plan:
- run tests
[ghstack-poisoned]
Added OpInfos for:
- F.adapative_avg_pool{1, 3}d
- F.avg_pool{1, 3}d
The 2d variants already had OpInfos.
Test Plan:
- run tests
[ghstack-poisoned]
Added OpInfos for:
- F.adapative_avg_pool{1, 3}d
- F.avg_pool{1, 3}d
The 2d variants already had OpInfos.
Test Plan:
- run tests
[ghstack-poisoned]
|
@zou3519 has imported this pull request. If you are a Facebook employee, you can view this diff on Phabricator. |
Added OpInfos for:
- F.adapative_avg_pool{1, 3}d
- F.avg_pool{1, 3}d
The 2d variants already had OpInfos.
Test Plan:
- run tests
Differential Revision: [D30667797](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D30667797)
[ghstack-poisoned]
Added OpInfos for:
- F.adapative_avg_pool{1, 3}d
- F.avg_pool{1, 3}d
The 2d variants already had OpInfos.
Test Plan:
- run tests
Differential Revision: [D30667797](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D30667797)
[ghstack-poisoned]
CI Flow Status⚛️ CI FlowRuleset - Version:
You can add a comment to the PR and tag @pytorchbot with the following commands: # ciflow rerun, "ciflow/default" will always be added automatically
@pytorchbot ciflow rerun
# ciflow rerun with additional labels "-l <ciflow/label_name>", which is equivalent to adding these labels manually and trigger the rerun
@pytorchbot ciflow rerun -l ciflow/scheduled -l ciflow/slowFor more information, please take a look at the CI Flow Wiki. |
|
Re-requesting review because it has been a while since the last review |
pmeier
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In general this looks good, but I have a few comments inline to make this more readable.
| dtypes=floating_types(), | ||
| dtypesIfCUDA=floating_types_and(torch.half, torch.bfloat16), | ||
| skips=( | ||
| DecorateInfo(unittest.skip("Skipped!"), 'TestJit', 'test_variant_consistency_jit'), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The other OpInfo's always include the dtypes to be skipped here
| DecorateInfo(unittest.skip("Skipped!"), 'TestJit', 'test_variant_consistency_jit'), | |
| DecorateInfo(unittest.skip("Skipped!"), 'TestJit', 'test_variant_consistency_jit', dtypes=(torch.float32,)), |
This comment applies to all occurrences.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As far as I can tell test_variant_consistency_jit only runs on float32 dtype. However, if it ran on more dtypes (if someone decides to turn that on in the future), then this test will definitely fail because the JIT has problems with this operator (and not just the (operator, dtype) combination). I'd prefer to leave the skip without specifying the dtype here, what do you think?
(Also, it looks like there are OpInfos that don't include the dtypes to be skipped, like
pytorch/torch/testing/_internal/common_methods_invocations.py
Lines 7618 to 7619 in ab25516
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Keeping a general skip is safer. A comment explaining the skip would be nice, though ;)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
A comment explaining the skip would be nice, though ;)
A comment doesn't hurt, but this is the test that is failing for a lot of operators. This is most likely an error in the test rather than in the operator. Do we have functionality to xfail a test?
Added OpInfos for:
- F.adapative_avg_pool{1, 3}d
- F.avg_pool{1, 3}d
The 2d variants already had OpInfos.
Test Plan:
- run tests
Differential Revision: [D30667797](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D30667797)
[ghstack-poisoned]
Added OpInfos for:
- F.adapative_avg_pool{1, 3}d
- F.avg_pool{1, 3}d
The 2d variants already had OpInfos.
Test Plan:
- run tests
Differential Revision: [D30667797](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D30667797)
[ghstack-poisoned]
Added OpInfos for:
- F.adapative_avg_pool{1, 3}d
- F.avg_pool{1, 3}d
The 2d variants already had OpInfos.
Test Plan:
- run tests
Differential Revision: [D30667797](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D30667797)
[ghstack-poisoned]
|
@zou3519 has imported this pull request. If you are a Facebook employee, you can view this diff on Phabricator. |
Added OpInfos for:
- F.adapative_avg_pool{1, 3}d
- F.avg_pool{1, 3}d
The 2d variants already had OpInfos.
Test Plan:
- run tests
Differential Revision: [D30667797](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D30667797)
[ghstack-poisoned]
|
@zou3519 has imported this pull request. If you are a Facebook employee, you can view this diff on Phabricator. |
Added OpInfos for:
- F.adapative_avg_pool{1, 3}d
- F.avg_pool{1, 3}d
The 2d variants already had OpInfos.
Test Plan:
- run tests
Differential Revision: [D30667797](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D30667797)
[ghstack-poisoned]
|
@zou3519 has imported this pull request. If you are a Facebook employee, you can view this diff on Phabricator. |
Stack from ghstack:
*_likefunctions #65941 OpInfo for*_likefunctionsAdded OpInfos for:
The 2d variants already had OpInfos.
Test Plan:
Differential Revision: D30667797