When we export a scripted function, we inline the original callable stored in "_torchdynamo_inline", this is the same strategy as torch.compile path.
We do the same thing for script method, where a "\_\_wrapped\_\_" attribute points to the original callable in most cases. There are some corner cases we identified: top-level jit.scripted modules' method doesn't have a \_\_wrapped\_\_. In this case, we fall back to the original scripted approach. Maybe there're more such cases but need verification.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/155180
Approved by: https://github.com/zou3519
Summary:
`c10::AttributeError` is not automatically converted to Python AttributeError, it needs some special macros (e.g. `HANDLE_TH_ERRORS`).
Some Python functions like `hasattr` rely on the type of the throw exception to be correct.
We don't need the fully generality of those macros, so just do a targeted error type conversion here.
Test Plan: added unit test
Differential Revision: D69197217
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/146516
Approved by: https://github.com/zdevito
Summary:
It seems we have multiple places deserializing torchbind objects. Moving the code around so that every load essentially share the same implementation.
Also added a test case "package_reader_testing" which load back the archive file in Python and eagerly validate the numerical result.
Test Plan: buck test mode/opt sigmoid/inference/test:e2e_test_cpu
Reviewed By: SherlockNoMad
Differential Revision: D61235770
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/133463
Approved by: https://github.com/ydwu4
Copy of #126089, with some additional fixes & tests
Partial fix for #125635: previously, the deepcopy implementation would group together any tensors with any aliasing relationship and assign them to the same tensor. This was sort of good if you have two tensors `b = a.detach()`, because then if you deepcopy `list = [a, b]` to `list2 = list.deepcopy()`, then writes to `list2[0]` will also modify `list2[1]`. But for the most part, it's bad; (1) if you have `b = a.as_strided((4, 4), (16, 1), 16)`, then it'll make `b == a` in the deepcopied implementation, which is completely wrong; and (2) even if you have `b = a.detach()`, these are still initially two different tensors which become the same tensor after the old deepcopy implementation.
The new implementation only groups together tensors that have the same identity. This is a partial fix, but it's more reasonable. What changes:
* (becomes more correct): different views of the same base tensor will no longer all become equal after deepcopying
* (still kind of wrong): views won't actually alias each other after deepcopying.
* (arguably a minor regression): equivalent views of the same tensor will no longer be copied to the same tensor - so they won't alias.
BC breaking: C++ deepcopy interface changes from accepting `IValue::HashAliasedIValueMap memo` to accepting `IValue::HashIdentityIValueMap memo`. If there are objections, we can keep the old API. However, it seems likely that users generally won't try to deepcopy from C++.
Differential Revision: [D57406306](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D57406306)
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/126126
Approved by: https://github.com/ezyang
Recently we made it possible to serialize ExportedPrograms with fake parameters/buffers/etc.
The serialization regime was kind of whacky; basically we serialized a stub and reassembled the FakeTensor using metadata that we had stashed elsewhere in the Graph state.
This was bad for a few reasons:
- Storing the metadata separately from the actual serialized object caused situations where you could have one but not the other. An example case is if you had a FakeTensor contained inside a TorchBind object—there was no obviously place to store the metadata for this. This actually happens—TensorQueue in fbgemm does this.
- It created an annoying cycle: we had to deserialize the Graph's tensor metadata in order to deserialize (potentially faked) constants, but we need constants in order to deserialize the Graph.
This fixes all that. The basic idea is to patch the reducer function for FakeTensor at serialization time, and serialize a copy of the FakeTensor metadata. We already are policing BC for the TensorMeta schema struct so it's not a net increase in the BC surface.
As a bonus, I fixed a weird bug with torchbind tracing where we were accidentally reinterpreting a torch.ScriptObject as a torch.ScriptModule (which was the root cause of some weird behavior @bahuang was seeing last week).
Differential Revision: [D53601251](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D53601251/)
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/119531
Approved by: https://github.com/zhxchen17
Summary:
There is an annoying inconsistency in how we pickle custom objs.
`torch.save` will invoke regular pickle, for which we have bound `__setstate__`/`__getstate__` methods on `torch.ScriptObject`: https://fburl.com/code/4howyl4u.
This serializes in a different format than TorchScript does, which uses the TS C++ pickler.
The issue we were facing was using the Python pickler to save, and the C++ pickler to load. If we use the C++ pickler to both save and load (plus some plumbing to get type/object resolution to work correctly), then things should work.
Test Plan:
ran SherlockNoMad's repro
```
buck2 run 'fbcode//mode/dev-nosan' scripts/bahuang:export_torchbind -- --logging DBG
```
Got to a new error, which has to do with how we're initializing the graph, but will leave that for future diffs.
Reviewed By: SherlockNoMad
Differential Revision: D53248454
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/118791
Approved by: https://github.com/qxy11, https://github.com/SherlockNoMad, https://github.com/khabinov
Fixes#111776
Support check_regex in FileCheck() by adding `find_regex` in `struct TORCH_API StringCordView`.
Callsite accepts RE syntax for std::regex.
However, I haven't figured out submatch ID yet.
For example, "buf5[0], buf6_inputs[0]" is still considered a match.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/112077
Approved by: https://github.com/yf225
When handling custom classes from Python, it is nice to be able to specify how they are displayed to the user.
Out of the two standard functions to do this, only `__str__` could be implemented in C++. This PR add `__repr__` to the allowlist of magic methods.
The second commit tweaks the default output of `__str__` to make it more informative, but I can remove the change if you want.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/100724
Approved by: https://github.com/ezyang
Without these changes, it can be hard to know which magic methods are not implemented on a given ScriptObject.
before:
```py
torch.ops.load_library("somelib.so")
c = torch.classes.somelib.SomeClass()
print(len(c))
# raise NotImplementedError
```
after:
```py
torch.ops.load_library("somelib.so")
c = torch.classes.somelib.SomeClass()
print(len(c))
# raise NotImplementedError: '__len__' is not implemented for __torch__.torch.classes.somelib.SomeClass
```
------
I could not find a linked issue, if you want me to open one as well I can do this.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/100171
Approved by: https://github.com/ezyang
Summary:
A very old refactor (https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/29500) split ScriptModule into ScriptObject (base class) and ScriptModule (subclass). When moving methods around, the `_type` method was moved from ScriptModule to ScriptObject, but the type of its argument wasn't changed. Therefore, it is now impossible to invoke `_type` on a ScriptObject.
The reason I need this fix is that I am using PyTorch's dispatch mode to intercept some operators that accept/return custom classes, which end up being encoded as ScriptObject, and in order to properly handle them I need to be able to verify their type.
Test Plan: N/A
Differential Revision: D45118675
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/99542
Approved by: https://github.com/albanD
Summary:
Extra C binding module for flatbuffer was introduced because
not all dependencies of Pytorch want (or can) bundle in flatbuffer.
However, flatbuffer is in by default now so this separate binding is not longer needed.
Test Plan: existing unit tests
Differential Revision: D44352583
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/97476
Approved by: https://github.com/dbort
**Summary** NamedTuple attributes can be annotated to declare their type:
```python
class MyNamedTuple(NamedTuple):
x: int
y: torch.Tensor
z: MyOtherType
```
Normally in python you can also declare your types as strings, `x: 'int'`. But NamedTuples previously didn't support this, because their annotation evaluation process was slightly different. This PR updates the NamedTuple attribute type annotation evaluation method to support ForwardRef declarations (i.e. declaring as strings).
**Details**
Below I repeat the comment I left in _jit_internal.py:
NamedTuple types are slightly different from normal types.
Normally, annotations are evaluted like this (during jit.script):
1. Load strings of python code into c++ and parse.
2. Get annotations as strings
3. Use the PythonResolver's resolution callback (rcb) to convert the string into a python object
4. We call into annotations.py:ann_to_type to convert python obj from step 3 into a type that torchscript understands.
NamedTuples are more complicated, because they have sub-types. Normally, once we have the NamedTuple type object from #3, we can just look at the annotation literal values and use ann_to_type directly on them.
But sometimes, users will annotate with string literals, e.g.
```
x: 'int'
```
This also happens with PEP563 (from __forward__ import annotations)
These annotations appear in the annotation dict as ForwardRef('int').
Then, we need to convert the string into a python object. This requires having local context for custom objects or imported types. rcb() is what gives us this. So, we plumb rcb through the stack so it can be used in this context for the if block below.
FAQ:
- Why do we need this special handling for NamedTuple but string annotations work fine for normal types? Normally, we parse the string directly and then call rcb() directly from C++.
- Why not use ForwardRef._evaluate? For that, we need globals() and locals() for the local context where the NamedTuple was defined. rcb is what lets us look up into these. So, basically rcb does the hard work for us.
- What is rcb? rcb is a ResolutionCallback - python callable that takes a string and returns a type. It's generated by `createResolutionCallback.*` in _jit_internal.py.
**Why is this only partial support**:
This only plumbs the rcb through some paths. In particular, the `toSugaredValue` path uses a fake rcb.
**Alternatives**:
We could also treat this the way we treat non-nn.Module classes: we evaluate them separately, ahead of time. That solution is probably better, but probably requires a more risky refactor for the way NamedTuples are handled.
Fixes#95858
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/96933
Approved by: https://github.com/qihqi
Not only is this change usually shorter and more readable, it also can yield better performance. size() is not always a constant time operation (such as on LinkedLists), but empty() always is.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/93236
Approved by: https://github.com/malfet
As we live in C++17 world
This is a functional no-op, just
- `s/namespace at { namespace native {/namespace at::native {/`
- `s/namespace torch { namespace jit {/namespace torch::jit {/`
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/92100
Approved by: https://github.com/izaitsevfb
Apply clang-tidy check modernize-use-emplace. This is slightly more efficient by using an inplace constructor and is the recommended style in parts of the codebase covered by clang-tidy. This just manually applies the check to rest of the codebase. Pinging @ezyang as this is related to my other PRs he reviewed like #89000
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/91077
Approved by: https://github.com/ezyang
Fixes minor perf regression I saw in #85688 and replaced throughout the code base. `obj == Py_None` is directly equivalent to is_none(). Constructing a temporary py::none() object needlessly incref/decref the refcount of py::none, this method avoids that and therefore is more efficient.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/88051
Approved by: https://github.com/albanD
# Support unpacking python dictionary in **torch.jit.trace()**
## Problem statement & Motivation
### Problem 1(usability):
Say, if you have a model and its forward method defined as follows:
**`def forward(self, key1=value1, key2=value2, key3=value3)`**
And you have a dataset and each data point in the dataset is a python dict as follows:
**`data = {key1:value1, key3:value3, key2:value2}`**
The problem is that if you want to trace the model using the dict data by the giving dataset, you need unpack the dictionary and reorder its value manually and make up a tuple as **`data_tuple = (value1, value2, value3)`** as the **`example_inputs`** parameter of **`torch.jit.trace()`**. This marshalling process is not user friendly.
### Problem 2 (feasibility):
Say, if you have a model and its forward method defined as follows:
**`def forward(self, key1=None, key2=None, key3=None)`** -> The default value is **None**
And you have a dataset and each data point in the dataset is a python dict as follows:
**`data = {key1:value1, key3:value3}`** -> Only **part of** the required value by forward was given, the rest use the default value.
The problem is that if you want to trace the model using the dict data by the giving dataset, it's not feasible at all. Cause neither you can pass a tuple like **`T1 = (value1, value3)`** nor **`T2 = (value1, None, value3)`**. T1 will mismatch value3 with key2 and T2 include **None** type which will be blocked by tracer's type checking. (Of course you can pass **`T3 = (value1,)`** to make the trace function finish without exception, but the traced model you get probably is not what you expect cause the different input may result in different traced result.).
These problems come from the HuggingFace's PT model, especially in text-classification tasks with datasets such as [MRPC,](https://paperswithcode.com/dataset/mrpc) [MNLI](https://paperswithcode.com/dataset/multinli) etc.
## Solution
To address these two issues, we propose to support a new type, that is, python dict as example_inputs parameter for torch.jit.trace(). We can base on the runtime type information of the example_inputs object to determine if we fall back to the original tuple path or go into the new dictionary path. Both problem 1 and problem 2 can be solved by utilizing the "**`**`**"
operator.
## Limitation & Mitigation
1. If we use dict as example_inputs to trace the model, then we have to pass a dictionary to the traced model too. (Cause probably we will change the order of debug name of the input parameter in torchscript IR, thus we can't assume the traced model's input parameters order are the same with the original model.). We need highlight this too in the document to mitigate this problem.
For example:
```
# fetch a data from dataloader, and the data is a dictionary
# and the example_inputs_dict is like: {key1:value1, key3:value3, key2:value2}
# the forward() is like: def forward(self, key1=value1, key2=value2, key3=value3)
example_inputs_dict = next(iter(dataloader))
jit_model = model.eval()
# use the dictionary to trace the model
jit_model = torch.jit.trace(jit_model, example_inputs_dict, strict=False) # Now the IR will be graph(%self : __torch__.module.___torch_mangle_n.Mymodule, %key1 : type1, %key3 : type3, %key2 : type2)
jit_model = torch.jit.freeze(jit_model)
# It's OK to use dict as the parameter for traced model
jit_model(**example_inputs_dict)
example_inputs_tuple = (value1, value3, value2)
# It's wrong to rely on the original args order.
jit_model(*example_inputs_tuple)
```
## Note
1. This PR will make some UT introduced in [39601](https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/39601) fail, which I think should be classified as unpacking a tuple containing a single dictionary element in our solution.
4. I think there is ambiguity since currently we only specify passing a tuple or a single Tensor as our example_inputs parameter in **torch.jit.trace()**'s documentation, but it seems we can still passing a dictionary.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/81623
Approved by: https://github.com/davidberard98
Summary:
This diff adds device side API which will convert the model to its
quantized equivalent. THe input model must have been prepared AOT for
quantization.
API is implemented by:
- Running reset obervers
- Running observe method
- Running quantize method
- And replacing method, e.g. forward, with its quantized equivalent.
Test Plan:
test/quantization/jit/test_ondevice_quantization.py
Reviewers:
Subscribers:
Tasks:
Tags:
Differential Revision: [D38889818](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D38889818)
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/83807
Approved by: https://github.com/iseeyuan
