Summary:
The current implementations of torch.real and torch.imag are not NumPy compatible. In particular:
- torch.real on a real tensor does not return the real tensor, like contiguous
- torch.real on a complex tensor does not return a real-valued view of the real part
- torch.imag on a complex tensor does not return a real-valued view of the imaginary part
- torch.Tensor.real and torch.Tensor.imag exist as methods, but in NumPy they are writable attributes
This PR makes the functions NumPy compatible by removing the method variants and out kwarg, restricting them to work on only real tensors, and updating the behavior of torch.real to return its input. New tests are added to test_torch.py to verify the behavior, a couple existing complex tests are skipped, and the documentation is updated to reflect the change.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/35560
Differential Revision: D20714568
Pulled By: mruberry
fbshipit-source-id: 5dd092f45757b620c8426c829dd15ee997246a26
Summary:
Per title. See related https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/34570.
In PyTorch 1.7 the plan is for torch.div and Python's division operator to perform "true" division, like Python 3, JAX, and NumPy. To facilitate this change, this PR expands true_divide to be a method so it can cover all of torch.div's use cases.
New true_divide tests are added to test_torch.py, test_type_promotion.py, and test_sparse.py.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/34794
Differential Revision: D20545507
Pulled By: mruberry
fbshipit-source-id: 55286f819716c8823d1930441a69008560ac2bd5
Summary:
(Updated per review feedback)
`torch.floor_divide` is currently a function that can operate on two tensors or a tensor and a scalar (scalar x scalar floor division is handled natively by Python and the JIT has a builtin function for it). This PR updates it to:
- have an out variant: `floor_divide(x, y, out=z)`
- be a method on a tensor: `x.floor_divide(y)`
- have an in-place variant: `x.floor_divide_(y)`
- work with sparse tensors
Tests are added to test_sparse.py and test_torch.py for these new behaviors.
In addition, this PR:
- cleans up the existing sparse division and true_division code and improves their error message
- adds testing of sparse true_division to test_sparse.py
- extends existing floor_divide testing in test_torch to run on CUDA, too, not just the CPU
Unfortunately, making floor_divide a method requires breaking backwards compatibility, and floor_divide has been added to the BC whitelist since this is international. The BC issue is that the first parameter name to torch.floor_divide is changing from input to self. If you previously called torch.floor_divide with keyword arguments, e.g. torch.floor_divide(input=x, other=y), you will need to update to torch.floor_divide(self=x, other=y), or the more common torch.floor_divide(x, y).
The intent of this PR is to allow floor_divide to be substituted for division (torch.div, /) wherever division was previously used. In 1.6 we expect torch.div to perform true_division, and floor_divide is how users can continue to perform integer division with tensors.
There are two potential follow-up issues suggested by this PR:
- the test framework might benefit from additional tensor construction classes, like one to create dividends and divisors for multiple dtypes
- the test framework might benefit from a universal function test class. while methods have reasonable coverage as part of test_torch.py's TestTensorOp tests, function coverage is spotty. Universal functions are similar enough it should be possible to generate tests for them.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/34552
Differential Revision: D20509850
Pulled By: mruberry
fbshipit-source-id: 2cd3c828aad67191c77f2ed8470411e246f604f8
Summary:
(Updated per review feedback)
`torch.floor_divide` is currently a function that can operate on two tensors or a tensor and a scalar (scalar x scalar floor division is handled natively by Python and the JIT has a builtin function for it). This PR updates it to:
- have an out variant: `floor_divide(x, y, out=z)`
- be a method on a tensor: `x.floor_divide(y)`
- have an in-place variant: `x.floor_divide_(y)`
- work with sparse tensors
Tests are added to test_sparse.py and test_torch.py for these new behaviors.
In addition, this PR:
- cleans up the existing sparse division and true_division code and improves their error message
- adds testing of sparse true_division to test_sparse.py
- extends existing floor_divide testing in test_torch to run on CUDA, too, not just the CPU
Unfortunately, making floor_divide a method requires breaking backwards compatibility, and floor_divide has been added to the BC whitelist since this is international. The BC issue is that the first parameter name to torch.floor_divide is changing from input to self. If you previously called torch.floor_divide with keyword arguments, e.g. torch.floor_divide(input=x, other=y), you will need to update to torch.floor_divide(self=x, other=y), or the more common torch.floor_divide(x, y).
The intent of this PR is to allow floor_divide to be substituted for division (torch.div, /) wherever division was previously used. In 1.6 we expect torch.div to perform true_division, and floor_divide is how users can continue to perform integer division with tensors.
There are two potential follow-up issues suggested by this PR:
- the test framework might benefit from additional tensor construction classes, like one to create dividends and divisors for multiple dtypes
- the test framework might benefit from a universal function test class. while methods have reasonable coverage as part of test_torch.py's TestTensorOp tests, function coverage is spotty. Universal functions are similar enough it should be possible to generate tests for them.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/34552
Differential Revision: D20497453
Pulled By: mruberry
fbshipit-source-id: ac326f2007d8894f730d1278fef84d63bcb07b5d
Summary:
Understanding which ops return views and which return tensors with new storage is a common user issue, and an issue for developers connecting accelerators to PyTorch, too. This generic test suite verifies that ops which should return views do (and a few ops that shouldn't don't). The documentation has also been updated for .t(), permute(), unfold(), and select() to clarify they return views.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/32512
Differential Revision: D19659454
Pulled By: mruberry
fbshipit-source-id: b4334be9b698253a979e1bb8746fdb3ca24aa4e3
Summary:
Continuation of https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/31514, fixes https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/28430
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/32009
Test Plan:
I verified that the deprecation warnings only occur once on a relevant workflow. Built with:
```
buck build mode/opt //vision/fair/detectron2/tools:train_net
```
Ran with:
```
DETECTRON2_ENV_MODULE=detectron2.fb.env ~/local/train_net.par --config-file configs/quick_schedules/retinanet_R_50_FPN_instant_test.yaml --num-gpus 1 SOLVER.IMS_PER_BATCH 2
```
Inspected log:
```
[01/14 07:28:13 d2.engine.train_loop]: Starting training from iteration 0
buck-out/opt/gen/caffe2/generate-code=python_variable_methods.cpp/python_variable_methods.cpp:1299: UserWarning: This overload of add is deprecated:
add(Number alpha, Tensor other)
Consider using one of the following signatures instead:
add(Tensor other, Number alpha)
buck-out/opt/gen/caffe2/generate-code=python_variable_methods.cpp/python_variable_methods.cpp:1334: UserWarning: This overload of add_ is deprecated:
add_(Number alpha, Tensor other)
Consider using one of the following signatures instead:
add_(Tensor other, Number alpha)
[01/14 07:28:25 d2.utils.events]: eta: 0:00:10 iter: 19 total_loss: 1.699 loss_cls: 1.185 loss_box_reg: 0.501 time: 0.5020 data_time: 0.0224 lr: 0.000100 max_mem: 3722M
[01/14 07:28:35 fvcore.common.checkpoint]: Saving checkpoint to ./output/model_final.pth
```
Differential Revision: D19373523
Pulled By: ezyang
fbshipit-source-id: 75756de129645501f43ecc4e3bf8cc0f78c40b90
Summary:
Fixes https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/28430
The unpythonic signatures for functions such as `torch.addcdiv` are already seperated in [`deprecated.yaml`] and the signatures marked as deprecated in `PythonArgParser`. However, nothing was done with this information previously. So, this now emits a warning when the deprecated signatures are used.
One minor complication is that if all arguments are passed as keyword args then there is nothing to differentiate the deprecated overload. This can lead to false warnings being emitted. So, I've also modified `PythonArgParser` to prefer non-deprecated signatures.
[`deprecated.yaml`]: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/blob/master/tools/autograd/deprecated.yaml
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/31514
Differential Revision: D19298735
Pulled By: ezyang
fbshipit-source-id: 03cb78af17658eaab9d577cd2497c6f413f07647
Summary:
With the CI failure caused in 8bbafa0b32d2899ef6101172d62c6049427c977b fixed (incorrect return type of the lambdas in CUDA kernels)
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/30521
Differential Revision: D18770151
Pulled By: ailzhang
fbshipit-source-id: 02f0fe1d5718c34d24da6dbb5884ee8b247ce39a
Summary:
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/27782
Warnings show up when running `make html` to build documentation. All of
the warnings are very reasonable and point to bugs in our docs. This PR
attempts to fix most of those warnings.
In the future we will add something to the CI that asserts that there
are no warnings in our docs.
Test Plan: - build and view changes locally
Differential Revision: D17887067
Pulled By: zou3519
fbshipit-source-id: 6bf4d08764759133b20983d6cd7f5d27e5ee3166
Summary:
Added Complex support with AVX to unary ops and binary ops.
I need to add nan propagation to minimum() and maximum() in the future.
In-tree changes to pytorch to support complex numbers are being submitted here.
Out-of-tree support for complex numbers is here: pytorch-cpu-strided-complex extension
Preliminary Benchmarks are here.
I tried rrii and riri and found that riri is better in most situations.
Divide is very slow because you can't reduce 1/(x+y)
Sqrt is also very slow.
Reciprocal could be sped up after I add conj()
Everything else is typically within 20% of the real number performance.
Questions:
Why does macOS not support mil? #if AT_MKL_ENABLED() && !defined(__APPLE__) in vml.h. MKL does support some complex operations like Abs, so I was curious about trying it.
Is MKL just calling AVX?
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/26500
Differential Revision: D17835431
Pulled By: ezyang
fbshipit-source-id: 6746209168fbeb567af340c22bf34af28286bd54
Summary:
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/27173
`docs/source/named_tensor.rst` is the entry point; most users will land
either here or the named tensor tutorial when looking to use named
tensors. We should strive to make this as readable, concise, and understandable
as possible.
`docs/source/name_inference.rst` lists all of the name inference rules.
It should be clear but it's hard to make it concise.
Please let me know if anything doesn't make sense and please propose
alternative wordings and/or restructuring to improve the documentation.
This should ultimately get cherry-picked into the 1.3 branch as one
monolithic commit so it would be good to get all necessary changes made
in this PR and not have any follow ups.
Test Plan: - built and reviewed locally with `cd docs/ && make html`.
Differential Revision: D17763046
Pulled By: zou3519
fbshipit-source-id: c7872184fc4b189d405b18dad77cad6899ae1522
Summary:
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/26675
Based on offline poll, we're very unlikely to have multi-axis quantized tensors in the foreseeable future. Let's simplify API and just return int instead of list. It also matches the singular `axis` name.
Test Plan: Imported from OSS
Differential Revision: D17537052
Pulled By: dzhulgakov
fbshipit-source-id: 676abc3b251d288468aaed467b5e5ca4063b98b0
Summary:
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/26240
In particular adds support for empty/empty_like which is needed for memory layouts to work.
Test Plan: Imported from OSS
Differential Revision: D17443220
Pulled By: dzhulgakov
fbshipit-source-id: 9c9e25981999c0edaf40be104a5741e9c62a1333
Summary:
This patch writes documentation for `Tensor.record_stream()`, which is not a documented API currently. I've discussed publishing it with colesbury in https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/issues/23729.
The documentation is based on [the introduction at `CUDACachingAllocator.cpp`](25d1496d58/c10/cuda/CUDACachingAllocator.cpp (L47-L50)). ~~I didn't explain full details of the life cycle of memory blocks or stream awareness of the allocator for the consistent level of details with other documentations.~~ I explained about the stream awareness in a note block.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/24078
Differential Revision: D16743526
Pulled By: zou3519
fbshipit-source-id: 05819c3cc96733e2ba93c0a7c0ca06933acb22f3
Summary:
Changelog:
- Rename `gels` to `lstsq`
- Fix all callsites
- Rename all tests
- Create a tentative alias for `lstsq` under the name `gels` and add a deprecation warning to not promote usage.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/23460
Test Plan: - All tests should pass to confirm that the patch is correct
Differential Revision: D16547834
Pulled By: colesbury
fbshipit-source-id: b3bdb8f4c5d14c7716c3d9528e40324cc544e496
