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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
A FusionDefinition wrapper that takes/produces DTensors. #3703
A FusionDefinition wrapper that takes/produces DTensors. #3703
Changes from 1 commit
856cd79
59e8cb9
6fc2c3e
40ce41b
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I guess it doesn't matter here since we only have 1d device_mesh for now.
But the logic doesn't feel right in this for loop with
for parallel_type in [nvfuser.ParallelType.mesh_x]:
. i.e. I think we need to check the rank of out_tensor.mesh. Which is only 1-d. So we can't really write a future proof thing here.^^^ I realized those aren't really constructive comments, I'm just trying to point out that we might need to put more thought on how we want to expose out_tensor.mesh. 😜
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Agreed. When nvFuser supports >1D mesh, we may want DeviceMesh to hold a torch.Tensor, similar to https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/blob/3917053f63b75f14e3cb2f53805fad4ade5363df/torch/distributed/device_mesh.py#L420.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
QQ: are we still required in nvfuser to have the shard dimension with
size == num_of_shard
?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We are gradually adding DID loop split so eventually this won't be a requirement. See test_communication.py and several
test_*_loop_split
s in test_multidevice.py recently added by @Priya2698