This test was never the shining star in class but it helped check that we can properly delete a stable library. But now that we are running it in CI this is not a good test to annoy people with as dlclose + parallelism is likely not the move. I will miss it locally though.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/153975
Approved by: https://github.com/jbschlosser
Related: #148920
This PR:
* Introduces a new file `test/cpp_extensions/python_agnostic_extension/test/test_python_agnostic.py` with testing that follows the usual python testing patterns
* This replaces the testing for python_agnostic in `test/test_cpp_extensions_aot.py`
After this PR, it is now possible to run:
```
python test/cpp_extensions/python_agnostic_extension/test/test_python_agnostic.py
```
and the test will build the prerequisite wheel before running the tests.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/153274
Approved by: https://github.com/janeyx99, https://github.com/cyyever
ghstack dependencies: #153264
Related: #148920
This PR:
* Provides a helper `install_cpp_extension(extension_root)` for building C++ extensions. This is intended to be used in `TestMyCppExtension.setUpClass()`
* Updates libtorch_agnostic tests to use this
* Deletes preexisting libtorch_agnostic tests from `test/test_cpp_extensions_aot.py`
* Fixes `run_test.py` to actually run tests in `test/cpp_extensions/libtorch_agnostic_extension/test/test_libtorch_agnostic.py` to avoid losing coverage. This wasn't being run due to logic excluding tests that start with "cpp"; this is fixed now
After this PR, it is now possible to run:
```
python test/cpp_extensions/libtorch_agnostic_extension/test/test_libtorch_agnostic.py
```
and the test will build the `libtorch_agnostic` extension before running the tests.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/153264
Approved by: https://github.com/janeyx99
As the title stated.
**Changes:**
- Remove unnecessary header file
- Remove unnecessary registry logic about PrivateUse1HooksRegistry，such as TORCH_DECLARE_REGISTRY, C10_DEFINE_REGISTRY, etc,.
- using static + global variable to do initialization instead of call_one
**Next Step:**
Enable test_openreg.py in CI/CD to guard the quality of PrivateUse1
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/151005
Approved by: https://github.com/albanD
I want to format and refactor the csrc file of pytorch_openreg. To make the code review clearer and easier to understand, I divide the code refactoring into two parts:
- Part 1: Code formatting
- Part 2: Code refactoring and optimization (Next PR)
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/151004
Approved by: https://github.com/albanD
ghstack dependencies: #151000
This change does 2 important things:
(a) Instead of relying on IValue type as source of truth, we use the schema as the source of truth, which is important as IValue types are overloaded and can ambiguously convert incorrectly. For example, a MemoryFormat will look like an int + get converted to an int64_t vs a MemoryFormat!
(b) This PR expands support for many more types to encompass way more schemas, e.g., Optional, Device, dtype, etc. The main win from this PR is the ability for aoti_torch_call_dispatcher to call TensorFactory ops like ones_like/empty_like!
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/149052
Approved by: https://github.com/albanD
This PR adds two main parts:
- shim.h stable C APIs into torch::Library APIs
- a higher level API in torch/csrc/stable/library.h that calls into this shim.h + otherwise is self contained
Goal: custom kernel writers should be able to call the apis in the directories above in order to register their library in a way that allows their custom extension to run with a different libtorch version than it was built with.
Subplots resolved:
- Do we want a whole separate StableLibrary or do we want to freeze torch::Library and add `m.stable_impl(cstring, void (*fn)(void **, int64_t, int64_t)` into it
- Yes, we want a separate StableLibrary. We cannot freeze Library and it is NOT header only.
- Should I use unint64_t as the common denominator instead of void* to support 32bit architectures better?
- Yes, and done
- Should I add a stable `def` and `fragment` when those can be done in python?
- I think we do want these --- and now they're done
- Where should library_stable_impl.cpp live? -- no longer relevant
- I need some solid test cases to make sure everything's going ok. I've intentionally thrown in a bunch of random dtypes into the signature, but I still haven't tested returning multiple things, returning nothing, complex dtypes, etc.
- Have since tested all the torch library endpoints. the others can be tested in a followup to separate components that need to be in shim.h vs can be added later
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/148124
Approved by: https://github.com/albanD, https://github.com/zou3519, https://github.com/atalman
This PR adds two main parts:
- shim.h stable C APIs into torch::Library APIs
- a higher level API in torch/csrc/stable/library.h that calls into this shim.h + otherwise is self contained
Goal: custom kernel writers should be able to call the apis in the directories above in order to register their library in a way that allows their custom extension to run with a different libtorch version than it was built with.
Subplots resolved:
- Do we want a whole separate StableLibrary or do we want to freeze torch::Library and add `m.stable_impl(cstring, void (*fn)(void **, int64_t, int64_t)` into it
- Yes, we want a separate StableLibrary. We cannot freeze Library and it is NOT header only.
- Should I use unint64_t as the common denominator instead of void* to support 32bit architectures better?
- Yes, and done
- Should I add a stable `def` and `fragment` when those can be done in python?
- I think we do want these --- and now they're done
- Where should library_stable_impl.cpp live? -- no longer relevant
- I need some solid test cases to make sure everything's going ok. I've intentionally thrown in a bunch of random dtypes into the signature, but I still haven't tested returning multiple things, returning nothing, complex dtypes, etc.
- Have since tested all the torch library endpoints. the others can be tested in a followup to separate components that need to be in shim.h vs can be added later
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/148124
Approved by: https://github.com/albanD, https://github.com/zou3519
This patch adds support for sycl kernels build via `torch.utils.cpp_extension.load`, `torch.utils.cpp_extension.load_inline` and (new) `class SyclExtension` APIs. Files having `.sycl` extension are considered to have sycl kernels and are compiled with `icpx` (dpc++ sycl compiler from Intel). Files with other extensions, `.cpp`, `.cu`, are handled as before. API supports building sycl along with other file types into single extension.
Note that `.sycl` file extension is a PyTorch convention for files containing sycl code which I propose to adopt. We did follow up with compiler team to introduce such file extension in the compiler, but they are opposed to this. At the same time discussion around sycl file extension and adding sycl language support into such tools as cmake is ongoing. Eventually cmake also considers to introduce some file extension convention for sycl. I hope we can further influence cmake and compiler communities to broader adopt `.sycl` file extension.
By default SYCL kernels are compiled for all Intel GPU devices for which pytorch native aten SYCL kernels are compiled. At the moment `pvc,xe-lpg`. This behavior can be overridden by setting `TORCH_XPU_ARCH_LIST` environment variables to the comma separated list of desired devices to compile for.
Fixes: #132944
CC: @gujinghui @EikanWang @fengyuan14 @guangyey @jgong5
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/132945
Approved by: https://github.com/albanD, https://github.com/guangyey, https://github.com/malfet
Co-authored-by: Nikita Shulga <2453524+malfet@users.noreply.github.com>
This patch adds support for sycl kernels build via `torch.utils.cpp_extension.load`, `torch.utils.cpp_extension.load_inline` and (new) `class SyclExtension` APIs. Files having `.sycl` extension are considered to have sycl kernels and are compiled with `icpx` (dpc++ sycl compiler from Intel). Files with other extensions, `.cpp`, `.cu`, are handled as before. API supports building sycl along with other file types into single extension.
Note that `.sycl` file extension is a PyTorch convention for files containing sycl code which I propose to adopt. We did follow up with compiler team to introduce such file extension in the compiler, but they are opposed to this. At the same time discussion around sycl file extension and adding sycl language support into such tools as cmake is ongoing. Eventually cmake also considers to introduce some file extension convention for sycl. I hope we can further influence cmake and compiler communities to broader adopt `.sycl` file extension.
By default SYCL kernels are compiled for all Intel GPU devices for which pytorch native aten SYCL kernels are compiled. At the moment `pvc,xe-lpg`. This behavior can be overridden by setting `TORCH_XPU_ARCH_LIST` environment variables to the comma separated list of desired devices to compile for.
Fixes: #132944
CC: @gujinghui @EikanWang @fengyuan14 @guangyey @jgong5
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/132945
Approved by: https://github.com/albanD, https://github.com/guangyey
This could be BC breaking, because there was a period of time when we use py_limited_api=True but don't enforce the flag, and now that we will start enforcing the flag, people's custom extensions may fail to build.
This is strictly still better behavior, as it is sketchy to claim CPython agnosticism without the flag, but calling this out as potential people yelling at us. Ways to mitigate this risk + reasons this may not be too big a deal:
- People haven't known about py_limited_api for extensions much due to lack of docs from python so usage is low right now
- My current tutorial is in store to make new users of py_limited_api pass this flag, so it'd be a noop for them.
Test plan:
* Locally i'm confident as I tried rebuilding ao with this change and it reliably failed (cuz importing torch/extension.h is a nono)
* Unit test wise, the normal python_agnostic one I added should work
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/145764
Approved by: https://github.com/ezyang, https://github.com/zou3519, https://github.com/albanD
Getting tested with ao, but now there is a real test i added.
## What does this PR do?
We want to allow custom PyTorch extensions to be able to build one wheel for multiple Python versions, in other words, achieve python agnosticism. It turns out that there is such a way that setuptools/Python provides already! Namely, if the user promises to use only the Python limited API in their extension, they can pass in `py_limited_api` to their Extension class and to the bdist_wheel command (with a min python version) in order to build 1 wheel that will suffice across multiple Python versions.
Sounds lovely! Why don't people do that already with PyTorch? Well 2 things. This workflow is hardly documented (even searching for python agnostic specifically does not reveal many answers) so I'd expect that people simply don't know about it. But even if they did, _PyTorch_ custom Extensions would still not work because we always link torch_python, which does not abide by py_limited_api rules.
So this is where this PR comes in! We respect when the user specifies py_limited_api and skip linking torch_python under that condition, allowing users to enroll in the provided functionality I just described.
## How do I know this PR works?
I manually tested my silly little ultra_norm locally (with `import python_agnostic`) and wrote a test case for the extension showing that
- torch_python doesn't show up in the ldd tree
- no Py- symbols show up
It may be a little confusing that our test case is actually python-free (more clean than python-agnostic) but it is sufficient (and not necessary) towards showing that this change works.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/138088
Approved by: https://github.com/ezyang, https://github.com/albanD
When executing the following code:
```
import pytorch_openreg
import torch
if __name__ == "__main__":
a = torch.tensor(1, device="openreg")
```
Sometimes releases tensor a failed after the process finishes executing `main` function. The trace of releasing `a` is `~Tensor()` -> ... -> `OpenRegMem.cpp` -> `OpenRegHooks.cpp` -> `_aten_impl.py`.
There are two failed scenarios I've found:
1. Segmentation fault: Before executing `~Tensor()`, the process has released global variables in `_aten_impl.py`, which causes the issue.
2. Waiting indefinitely: The main process passes the `free ptr` command to deamon process, however daemon processes have shutdown.
The way to fix this issue is when the process is shutting down, we ignore the del ptr operation.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/140936
Approved by: https://github.com/ezyang
