Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Fixbug] Fix for softmmax cpu causing issues #437

Closed
wants to merge 81 commits into from

Conversation

fishingguy456
Copy link
Contributor

moved implement_cpu to the cpu task

works on 8x8 at least but bad exp

save for omp changes

working and faster than pytorch

works and is fast but exp is WIP

remove useless files

minor changes for rebase

delete trash

fix trash

fix trash

initial commit

works on 8x8 at least but bad exp

save for omp changes

working and faster than pytorch

works and is fast but exp is WIP

remove useless files

minor changes for rebase

delete trash

fix trash

fix trash

change imports

fix for diff size, compiledmodule error fix
works on 8x8 at least but bad exp

save for omp changes

working and faster than pytorch

works and is fast but exp is WIP

remove useless files

minor changes for rebase

delete trash

fix trash

fix trash
works on 8x8 at least but bad exp

save for omp changes

working and faster than pytorch

works and is fast but exp is WIP

remove useless files

minor changes for rebase

delete trash

fix trash

fix trash
works on 8x8 at least but bad exp

save for omp changes

working and faster than pytorch

works and is fast but exp is WIP

remove useless files

minor changes for rebase

delete trash

fix trash

fix trash
@yaoyaoding yaoyaoding changed the title fix for softmmax cpu causing issues [Fixbug] Fix for softmmax cpu causing issues Mar 13, 2024
vadiklyutiy pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 19, 2024
…rm` during operator fusion pass (#437)

Closes #393 

I spent some time looking into the issue without much progress, but I
first found that the error message in the linked issue disappeared after
commenting out either the `resolve_variant_pass()` or
`fuse_operator_pass()`
[here](https://github.com/CentML/hidet/blob/bfbb4db6d7792ed3de3be4e9702e597b8fbbe373/python/hidet/graph/transforms/__init__.py#L55-L61).
Then, I found that simply adding the `EmbeddingBagOp` to the
`NOT_FUSIBLE` set resolves the error.

It is a workaround for now, but I am unaware of better solutions.
vadiklyutiy pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 20, 2024
…rm` during operator fusion pass (#437)

Closes #393 

I spent some time looking into the issue without much progress, but I
first found that the error message in the linked issue disappeared after
commenting out either the `resolve_variant_pass()` or
`fuse_operator_pass()`
[here](https://github.com/CentML/hidet/blob/bfbb4db6d7792ed3de3be4e9702e597b8fbbe373/python/hidet/graph/transforms/__init__.py#L55-L61).
Then, I found that simply adding the `EmbeddingBagOp` to the
`NOT_FUSIBLE` set resolves the error.

It is a workaround for now, but I am unaware of better solutions.
@vadiklyutiy
Copy link
Collaborator

@yaoyaoding
Do you remember about this changes? Do we need it?

vadiklyutiy pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 26, 2024
…rm` during operator fusion pass (#437)

Closes #393 

I spent some time looking into the issue without much progress, but I
first found that the error message in the linked issue disappeared after
commenting out either the `resolve_variant_pass()` or
`fuse_operator_pass()`
[here](https://github.com/CentML/hidet/blob/bfbb4db6d7792ed3de3be4e9702e597b8fbbe373/python/hidet/graph/transforms/__init__.py#L55-L61).
Then, I found that simply adding the `EmbeddingBagOp` to the
`NOT_FUSIBLE` set resolves the error.

It is a workaround for now, but I am unaware of better solutions.
@yaoyaoding
Copy link
Member

Seems there is some problem in the non-fp32 softmax but I don't remember the exact problem. But it's okay to close this and add a PR to fix the problem by fixing the operator template.

@yaoyaoding yaoyaoding closed this Jan 6, 2025
@fishingguy456
Copy link
Contributor Author

I don't remember the issue exactly but I think it had something to do with the kernel working in isolation but not when it was included in a larger model graph because I put one of the functions in the wrong place. The change is simple so it can just be incorporated in another PR.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants