functionalization: add native fill() op#76084
Closed
bdhirsh wants to merge 9 commits intogh/bdhirsh/210/basefrom
Closed
functionalization: add native fill() op#76084bdhirsh wants to merge 9 commits intogh/bdhirsh/210/basefrom
bdhirsh wants to merge 9 commits intogh/bdhirsh/210/basefrom
Conversation
[ghstack-poisoned]
This was referenced Apr 20, 2022
Contributor
🔗 Helpful links
💊 CI failures summary and remediationsAs of commit 1788d58 (more details on the Dr. CI page): Expand to see more
🕵️ 1 new failure recognized by patternsThe following CI failures do not appear to be due to upstream breakages
|
[ghstack-poisoned]
bdhirsh
commented
Apr 20, 2022
| 'zero', # only used by the functionalization pass, doesn't need to be exposed to python | ||
| 'copy', # only used by the functionalization pass | ||
| 'fill.Tensor', # only used by the functionalization pass | ||
| 'fill.Scalar', # only used by the functionalization pass |
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This info should probably get moved into native_functions.yaml at some point
Addresses `fill_` issue in pytorch/torchdynamo#88 Adding out-of-place `fill.Tensor` and `fill.Scalar` ops, that way `fill_()` can be properly functionalized. I ended up giving `fill` a derivative formula, because I think that we want to consider it a "base op" as part of tracing. The decomposition I wrote for it just calls back into `fill_()`, so we don't want to run that decomposition as part of tracing. [ghstack-poisoned]
This was referenced Apr 20, 2022
ezyang
approved these changes
Apr 21, 2022
Addresses `fill_` issue in pytorch/torchdynamo#88 Adding out-of-place `fill.Tensor` and `fill.Scalar` ops, that way `fill_()` can be properly functionalized. I ended up giving `fill` a derivative formula, because I think that we want to consider it a "base op" as part of tracing. The decomposition I wrote for it just calls back into `fill_()`, so we don't want to run that decomposition as part of tracing. [ghstack-poisoned]
This was referenced Apr 21, 2022
Addresses `fill_` issue in pytorch/torchdynamo#88 Adding out-of-place `fill.Tensor` and `fill.Scalar` ops, that way `fill_()` can be properly functionalized. I ended up giving `fill` a derivative formula, because I think that we want to consider it a "base op" as part of tracing. The decomposition I wrote for it just calls back into `fill_()`, so we don't want to run that decomposition as part of tracing. [ghstack-poisoned]
Addresses `fill_` issue in pytorch/torchdynamo#88 Adding out-of-place `fill.Tensor` and `fill.Scalar` ops, that way `fill_()` can be properly functionalized. I ended up giving `fill` a derivative formula, because I think that we want to consider it a "base op" as part of tracing. The decomposition I wrote for it just calls back into `fill_()`, so we don't want to run that decomposition as part of tracing. [ghstack-poisoned]
Addresses `fill_` issue in pytorch/torchdynamo#88 Adding out-of-place `fill.Tensor` and `fill.Scalar` ops, that way `fill_()` can be properly functionalized. I ended up giving `fill` a derivative formula, because I think that we want to consider it a "base op" as part of tracing. The decomposition I wrote for it just calls back into `fill_()`, so we don't want to run that decomposition as part of tracing. [ghstack-poisoned]
Addresses `fill_` issue in pytorch/torchdynamo#88 Adding out-of-place `fill.Tensor` and `fill.Scalar` ops, that way `fill_()` can be properly functionalized. I ended up giving `fill` a derivative formula, because I think that we want to consider it a "base op" as part of tracing. The decomposition I wrote for it just calls back into `fill_()`, so we don't want to run that decomposition as part of tracing. [ghstack-poisoned]
This was referenced Apr 25, 2022
Addresses `fill_` issue in pytorch/torchdynamo#88 Adding out-of-place `fill.Tensor` and `fill.Scalar` ops, that way `fill_()` can be properly functionalized. I ended up giving `fill` a derivative formula, because I think that we want to consider it a "base op" as part of tracing. The decomposition I wrote for it just calls back into `fill_()`, so we don't want to run that decomposition as part of tracing. [ghstack-poisoned]
Collaborator
Author
|
@pytorchbot merge this please |
Collaborator
|
Merge failed due to Command Raised by https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/actions/runs/2222996651 |
facebook-github-bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 26, 2022
Summary: Pull Request resolved: #76084 Approved by: https://github.com/ezyang Test Plan: contbuild & OSS CI, see https://hud.pytorch.org/commit/pytorch/pytorch/ea5209c9fd78a34849600875d0f3f5b994201833 Reviewed By: osalpekar Differential Revision: D35938183 Pulled By: bdhirsh fbshipit-source-id: 73c318c03e49671cdaee997807e2dba2a0c57198
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
5 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.
Addresses
fill_issue in pytorch/torchdynamo#88Adding out-of-place
fill.Tensorandfill.Scalarops, that wayfill_()can be properly functionalized.I ended up giving
filla derivative formula, because I think that we want to consider it a "base op" as part of tracing. The decomposition I wrote for it just calls back intofill_(), so we don't want to run that decomposition as part of tracing.Stack from ghstack: