Skip to content

Conversation

@Kiyosora
Copy link
Contributor

@Kiyosora Kiyosora commented Jun 28, 2021

Porting torch.float_power to structured kernel
Related #55070

@facebook-github-bot
Copy link
Contributor

facebook-github-bot commented Jun 28, 2021

🔗 Helpful links

💊 CI failures summary and remediations

As of commit 84533c1 (more details on the Dr. CI page):


💚 💚 Looks good so far! There are no failures yet. 💚 💚


This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI (expand for details).Follow this link to opt-out of these comments for your Pull Requests.

Please report bugs/suggestions to the (internal) Dr. CI Users group.

Click here to manually regenerate this comment.

@Kiyosora Kiyosora force-pushed the structured_float_power branch 6 times, most recently from 2511c13 to ddecdc5 Compare July 2, 2021 01:16
@Kiyosora Kiyosora force-pushed the structured_float_power branch from ddecdc5 to 84533c1 Compare July 2, 2021 05:14
@Kiyosora Kiyosora changed the title [WIP] Port float_power kernel to structured kernels Port float_power kernel to structured kernels Jul 2, 2021
@Kiyosora Kiyosora marked this pull request as ready for review July 2, 2021 08:55
@ezyang
Copy link
Contributor

ezyang commented Jul 6, 2021

Hmm, unfortunately, we might not actually want to port float_power as is without #50953

The big change you made here is that the kernel was previously implicit autograd, and you've made it explicit autograd (with explicit CPU and CUDA backends). But the downside to doing this is that if I'm some random external backend (e.g., XLA), float_power will no longer work unless I explicitly define it separately. And it's not like meta tensors didn't work with the old implementation (because it was structured). It seems like maybe this shouldn't have been on the TODO list :(

@ezyang ezyang requested a review from SplitInfinity July 6, 2021 16:38
@soulitzer soulitzer added the triaged This issue has been looked at a team member, and triaged and prioritized into an appropriate module label Jul 9, 2021
@albanD albanD removed their request for review July 12, 2021 00:45
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Looks like this PR hasn't been updated in a while so we're going to go ahead and mark this as Stale.
Feel free to remove the Stale label if you feel this was a mistake.
If you are unable to remove the Stale label please contact a maintainer in order to do so.
If you want the bot to never mark this PR stale again, add the no-stale label.
Stale pull requests will automatically be closed after 30 days of inactivity.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale label Apr 13, 2022
@github-actions github-actions bot closed this May 13, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

cla signed open source Stale triaged This issue has been looked at a team member, and triaged and prioritized into an appropriate module

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants