This reverts commit a58876ace78df1cfeb136cad592487f34d7e02f1.
Reverted https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/74727 on behalf of https://github.com/seemethere due to Fails internal use cases, might extend out to external use cases as well. Need to assess overall impact of this change more widely
**Reopened** to help with merge issues. See #59790 for full context.
Fixes#20778. Helps #71688.
Finalizes @martinPasen's force argument for `Tensor.numpy()`. It is set to False by default. If it's set to True then we:
1. detatch the Tensor, if requires_grad == True
2. move to cpu, if not on cpu already
3. Uses .resolve_conj() if .is_conj() == True
4. Uses .resolve_neg() if .is_neg() == True
cc @albanD
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/78564
Approved by: https://github.com/albanD
Summary:
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/74226
Update signature of `scatter_reduce_` to match `scatter_/scatter_add_`
`Tensor.scatter_reduce_(int64 dim, Tensor index, Tensor src, str reduce)`
- Add new reduction options in ScatterGatherKernel.cpp and update `scatter_reduce` to call into the cpu kernel for `scatter.reduce`
- `scatter_reduce` now has the same shape constraints as `scatter_` and `scatter_add_`
- Migrate `test/test_torch.py:test_scatter_reduce` to `test/test_scatter_gather_ops.py`
Test Plan: Imported from OSS
Reviewed By: ngimel
Differential Revision: D35222842
Pulled By: mikaylagawarecki
fbshipit-source-id: 84930add2ad30baf872c495251373313cb7428bd
(cherry picked from commit 1b45139482e22eb0dc8b6aec2a7b25a4b58e31df)
Summary:
Fixes https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/65908
Added a new overload instead of updating the current signature. (Had issues with JIT and **maybe** it would have been FC breaking)
TODO:
* [x] Don't compute `std::pow(10, decimals)` for each element.
* [x] Update docs (https://docs-preview.pytorch.org/66195/generated/torch.round.html?highlight=round#torch.round)
* [x] Add tests
* ~~Should we try to make it composite?~~
* ~~Should we add specialized test with more values of `decimals` outside of OpInfo with larger range of values in input tensor?~~
cc mruberry rgommers
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/66195
Reviewed By: anjali411
Differential Revision: D31821385
Pulled By: mruberry
fbshipit-source-id: 9a03fcb809440f0c83530108284e69c345e1850f
(cherry picked from commit 50b67c696880b8dcfc42796956b4780b83bf7a7e)
Summary:
Hi, PyTorch Team!
I am very much interested in starting up my contribution to PyTorch. I made several contributions in NumPy and CuPy, but this is my first PR towards PyTorch. I aim to contribute more in the upcoming future.
The PR fixes https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/70972https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/70975.
#### Aim of PR
The functions like `Tensor.ravel`, `Tensor.tril`, `Tensor.tril_`, `Tensor.triu`, and `Tensor.triu_` had a couple of typos in docs. The PR aims to resolve that.
I'm looking forward to your viewpoints. Thanks!
cc: kshitij12345 vadimkantorov Lezcano TestSomething22
cc brianjo mruberry
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/71057
Reviewed By: preeti1205
Differential Revision: D33502911
Pulled By: mruberry
fbshipit-source-id: 8ce0b68a29658a5a0be79bc807dfa7d71653532d
Summary:
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/65993
This PR attempts to port `index_add` to structured kernels, but does more than that:
* Adds an `out=` variant to `index_add`
* Revises `native_functions.yaml` registrations, to not have multiple entries and instead pass default value to `alpha`.
* Changes in `derivatives.yaml` file for autograd functioning
* Revises error messages, please see: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/65993#issuecomment-945441615
Follow-up PRs in near future will attempt to refactor the OpInfo test, and will give another look at tests in `test/test_torch.py` for this function. (hence the use of ghstack for this)
~This is WIP because there are tests failing for `Dimname` variant on mobile/android builds, and I'm working on fixing them.~
Issue tracker: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/55070
Test Plan: Imported from OSS
Reviewed By: ejguan
Differential Revision: D32646426
fbshipit-source-id: b035ecf843a9a27d4d1e18b202b035adc2a49ab5
Summary:
### Create `linalg.cross`
Fixes https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/62810
As discussed in the corresponding issue, this PR adds `cross` to the `linalg` namespace (**Note**: There is no method variant) which is slightly different in behaviour compared to `torch.cross`.
**Note**: this is NOT an alias as suggested in mruberry's [https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/62810 comment](https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/62810#issuecomment-897504372) below
> linalg.cross being consistent with the Python Array API (over NumPy) makes sense because NumPy has no linalg.cross. I also think we can implement linalg.cross without immediately deprecating torch.cross, although we should definitely refer users to linalg.cross. Deprecating torch.cross will require additional review. While it's not used often it is used, and it's unclear if users are relying on its unique behavior or not.
The current default implementation of `torch.cross` is extremely weird and confusing. This has also been reported multiple times previously. (See https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/17229, https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/39310, https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/41850, https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/50273)
- [x] Add `torch.linalg.cross` with default `dim=-1`
- [x] Add OpInfo and other tests for `torch.linalg.cross`
- [x] Add broadcasting support to `torch.cross` and `torch.linalg.cross`
- [x] Remove out skip from `torch.cross` OpInfo
- [x] Add docs for `torch.linalg.cross`. Improve docs for `torch.cross` mentioning `linalg.cross` and the difference between the two. Also adds a warning to `torch.cross`, that it may change in the future (we might want to deprecate it later)
---
### Additional Fixes to `torch.cross`
- [x] Fix Doc for Tensor.cross
- [x] Fix torch.cross in `torch/overridres.py`
While working on `linalg.cross` I noticed these small issues with `torch.cross` itself.
[Tensor.cross docs](https://pytorch.org/docs/stable/generated/torch.Tensor.cross.html) still mentions `dim=-1` default which is actually wrong. It should be `dim=None` after the behaviour was updated in PR https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/17582 but the documentation for the `method` or `function` variant wasn’t updated. Later PR https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/41850 updated the documentation for the `function` variant i.e `torch.cross` and also added the following warning about the weird behaviour.
> If `dim` is not given, it defaults to the first dimension found with the size 3. Note that this might be unexpected.
But still, the `Tensor.cross` docs were missed and remained outdated. I’m finally fixing that here. Also fixing `torch/overrides.py` for `torch.cross` as well now, with `dim=None`.
To verify according to the docs the default behaviour of `dim=-1` should raise, you can try the following.
```python
a = torch.randn(3, 4)
b = torch.randn(3, 4)
b.cross(a) # this works because the implementation finds 3 in the first dimension and the default behaviour as shown in documentation is actually not true.
>>> tensor([[ 0.7171, -1.1059, 0.4162, 1.3026],
[ 0.4320, -2.1591, -1.1423, 1.2314],
[-0.6034, -1.6592, -0.8016, 1.6467]])
b.cross(a, dim=-1) # this raises as expected since the last dimension doesn't have a 3
>>> RuntimeError: dimension -1 does not have size 3
```
Please take a closer look (particularly the autograd part, this is the first time I'm dealing with `derivatives.yaml`). If there is something missing, wrong or needs more explanation, please let me know. Looking forward to the feedback.
cc mruberry Lezcano IvanYashchuk rgommers
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/63285
Reviewed By: gchanan
Differential Revision: D32313346
Pulled By: mruberry
fbshipit-source-id: e68c2687c57367274e8ddb7ef28ee92dcd4c9f2c
Summary:
Adds `torch.argwhere` as an alias to `torch.nonzero`
Currently, `torch.nonzero` is actually provides equivalent functionality to `np.argwhere`.
From NumPy docs,
> np.argwhere(a) is almost the same as np.transpose(np.nonzero(a)), but produces a result of the correct shape for a 0D array.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/64257
Reviewed By: qihqi
Differential Revision: D32049884
Pulled By: saketh-are
fbshipit-source-id: 016e49884698daa53b83e384435c3f8f6b5bf6bb
