functionalization: fix bug with multiple views of same base#77129
Closed
bdhirsh wants to merge 16 commits intogh/bdhirsh/227/basefrom
Closed
functionalization: fix bug with multiple views of same base#77129bdhirsh wants to merge 16 commits intogh/bdhirsh/227/basefrom
bdhirsh wants to merge 16 commits intogh/bdhirsh/227/basefrom
Conversation
[ghstack-poisoned]
This was referenced May 10, 2022
Contributor
🔗 Helpful links
✅ No Failures (0 Pending)As of commit 9c04725 (more details on the Dr. CI page): Expand to see more💚 💚 Looks good so far! There are no failures yet. 💚 💚 This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI (expand for details).Please report bugs/suggestions to the (internal) Dr. CI Users group. |
This was referenced May 10, 2022
[ghstack-poisoned]
ezyang
reviewed
May 11, 2022
| regenerate_from_base(); | ||
| } | ||
| apply_updates(); | ||
| regenerate_from_base(); |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Now you get to explain, in the code here, why skipping regeneration when there are no updates is wrong ;)
ezyang
approved these changes
May 11, 2022
Contributor
ezyang
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I figured it out looking at the test, haha. Nice catch.
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]
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]
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]
This was referenced 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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
facebook-github-bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 26, 2022
Summary: Pull Request resolved: #77129 Approved by: https://github.com/ezyang Test Plan: contbuild & OSS CI, see https://hud.pytorch.org/commit/pytorch/pytorch/2eea5eff622df108f2f77dda61ddec3a62b51e51 Reviewed By: mehtanirav Differential Revision: D36668391 Pulled By: bdhirsh fbshipit-source-id: 4ab5fc8db24b83b7b1c8bfe17f82d687e64ad7bc
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.
welp, I realized my "perf improvement" from #75819 was wrong. This originally came up because
functionalize()was sometimes emit an unnecessaryview_copy, but there's a more correct fix that I can make inside of functorch, which I have here: pytorch/functorch#795Stack from ghstack: