[dynamo] resolve InlinedClosureVariable in InstructionTranslator stack #106491
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
🔗 Helpful Links🧪 See artifacts and rendered test results at hud.pytorch.org/pr/106491
Note: Links to docs will display an error until the docs builds have been completed. ✅ No FailuresAs of commit ef6821f: This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI and updates every 15 minutes. |
ydwu4
added
ciflow/trunk
williamwen42
approved these changes
Aug 2, 2023
jansel
approved these changes
Aug 3, 2023
zou3519
approved these changes
Aug 3, 2023
Contributor
Author
|
@pytorchbot merge |
Collaborator
Merge startedYour change will be merged once all checks pass (ETA 0-4 Hours). Learn more about merging in the wiki. Questions? Feedback? Please reach out to the PyTorch DevX Team |
StrongerXi
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 8, 2024
…nother function See #136814 for more context. In #90286, we introduced an optimization so that for captured cells that are unmodified during a Dynamo trace, `UserFunctionVariable` will represent them as variable of the cell's actual value, rather than a `NewCellVariable`. Later on we introduced more mechanisms to model such cells across function calls (#104222), and across function calls where `NestedUserFunctionVariable::bind_args` need to look up further in the parent frames (#106491) to find these cells' values. This patch removes `InlinedClosureVariable` in favor of a simpler modelling which is also more consistent with what was introduced in #90286, i.e., just model these cells as their contents, in `symbolic_locals`. This fixes #136814 because resolution of `InlinedClosureVariable` to the underlying cell content value happens in `NestedUserFunctionVariable::bind_args`, which requires Dynamo to have the value in scope at the function call site (when Dynamo starts inlining), but's not always the case (as the test case shows). However, if we model the cells in `symbolic_locals`, we never need such resolution, and the values are directly stored into the `NestedUserFunctionVariable::closure` upon the function creation, at which point Dynamo always has the cell value in `symbolic_locals` for look up. Fixes #136814.
pytorchmergebot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 9, 2024
…nother function (#137510) See `test_inline_closure_returned_by_another_function_and_captures` and #136814 for more context. In #90286, we introduced an optimization so that for captured cells that are unmodified during a Dynamo trace, `UserFunctionVariable` will represent them as variable of the cell's actual value, rather than a `NewCellVariable`. Later on we introduced more mechanisms to model such cells across function calls (#104222), and across function calls where `NestedUserFunctionVariable::bind_args` need to look up further in the parent frames (#106491) to find these cells' values. This patch removes `InlinedClosureVariable` in favor of a simpler modelling, which is also more consistent with what was introduced in #90286, i.e., just model these cells as their contents, in `symbolic_locals`. This fixes #136814 because resolution of `InlinedClosureVariable` to the underlying cell content value happens in `NestedUserFunctionVariable::bind_args`, which requires Dynamo to have the value in scope at the function call site (when Dynamo does inlining), but's not always the case (as the test case shows). However, if we model the cells in `symbolic_locals`, we never need such resolution, and the values are directly stored into the `NestedUserFunctionVariable::closure` upon the function creation, at which point Dynamo always has the cell value in `symbolic_locals` for look up. Fixes #136814. Pull Request resolved: #137510 Approved by: https://github.com/williamwen42
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
When inlining a function which loads a closure, its direct parent may not load that closure. So we cannot find the closure name in parent's symbolic locals. In this PR, we fix it by recursively searching the parent instruction translator stack to resolve the closure.
Background
When developing #105679, this corner case is triggered. A small repro is added in the test of this pr, where outer is loaded by deep2 but not by deep.
Running the test, we have the following error before the PR:
Test Plan:
add new test
cc @voznesenskym @penguinwu @anijain2305 @EikanWang @jgong5 @Guobing-Chen @XiaobingSuper @zhuhaozhe @blzheng @Xia-Weiwen @wenzhe-nrv @jiayisunx @ipiszy @chenyang78 @aakhundov