Summary:
Add experimental support for torch.nn.Module as input types.
Before this change, we don't support module inputs but recently we saw some interesting use cases like gpt-fast https://github.com/pytorch-labs/gpt-fast/blob/main/generate.py#L68 where we directly pass in a module input for different variants of the same models.
Since we don't really care about non-param or non-buffer states in non strict mode, we don't care about those either and pretend they are like plain constants during tracing. We treat any module input like a nested container of tensor, and each time we will automatically register a pytree handler for these module types to flatten its state dict into a group of tensors. We will just inline any module method call during tracing like we did for `self` module in export_for_training. This will make input modules' behavior very similar to the training module in typical case, except that we don't record the inputs as parameter or buffers but rather just plain user inputs.
Test Plan: buck run mode/opt caffe2/test:test_export -- -r test_module_input
Differential Revision: D67680827
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/143925
Approved by: https://github.com/tugsbayasgalan
Optimize unnecessary collection cast calls, unnecessary calls to list, tuple, and dict, and simplify calls to the sorted builtin. This should strictly improve speed and improve readability.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/94323
Approved by: https://github.com/albanD
Summary:
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/62292
This PR adds pytree support for namedtuples. The challenge about namedtuple
is that each namedtuple class is actually different. This PR does the
following:
- it adds a namedtuple flatten/unflatten. The flatten function returns
a context that is the actual type of the namedtuple subclass. The
unflatten function uses that type to reconstruct the namedtuple
- Special cases all pytree logic to consider all namedtuples the same.
This is done by creating a `_get_node_type(pytree)` helper function that
returns `namedtuple` if `pytree` is any namedtuple subclass. The effect
of this is that all namedtuple subclasses will go through the namedtuple
flatten/unflatten functions
- Adds a `_namedtuple_flatten_spec` function for FX pytrees. This function
flattens the namedtuple based on the spec and is equivalent to the
`_tuple_flatten_spec`.
Test Plan
- new tests in test/test_pytree.py and test/test_fx.py
Test Plan: Imported from OSS
Reviewed By: albanD
Differential Revision: D29947302
Pulled By: zou3519
fbshipit-source-id: 19c00665b13546642c315df0f243ad99b8e7ff7c
Summary:
```
class Foo(nn.Module):
def __init__(self):
super().__init__()
def forward(self, y, x):
for k in x:
for v in x[k]:
v += y
return x
example_dict = {'x': {'a': [fx.HOLE], 'z': [fx.HOLE, fx.HOLE]}}
new_f = fx.symbolic_trace(Foo(), concrete_args=example_dict)
print(new_f.code)
new_f(torch.randn(5), {'x': {'a': [torch.randn(5)], 'z': [torch.randn(5), torch.randn(5)]}})
fx.symbolic_trace(new_f, concrete_args=example_dict)
```
prints out
```
def forward(self, y, x):
y, tree_2, tree_3, tree_4 = pytree.tree_flatten([y, x])[0]
add = tree_2 + y
add_1 = tree_3 + y
add_2 = tree_4 + y; y = None
return {'a': [tree_2], 'z': [tree_3, tree_4]}
```
Currently, I store `in_spec` as an extra attribute on `fx.Graph`, and then include it when we do the codegen. I'm not sure if this is the right approach - it introduces a divergence between what's in `fx.Graph` and what's in the python code.
Perhaps the best API is something explicit like `fx.Graph.flatten_args`, but that does make calling things a bit ... more verbose.
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/55888
Reviewed By: jamesr66a
Differential Revision: D27884694
Pulled By: Chillee
fbshipit-source-id: f9e8a70c63a8df63c9f9bd0a6459255daa5a8df8
