Have a dynamo backend backend by torchax.
The users should be able to do the following:
m = model ...
m_compiled = torch.compile(m, backend='torchax_compile') # backend name TBD
result = m_compiled(*inputs)
The above should run on TPU will low overhead.
Usually the challenge of a dynamo backend is the compiler that transforms a fx graph with torch (or Aten) ops to the compiled executable. However, in our case, that piece is solved.
For every call_function
node; we lookup the corresponding implementation of
said ATen op in a dictionary for it's corresponding implementation in Jax,
and we just call it.
This is illustrated here: https://github.com/pytorch/xla/blob/master/experimental/torchax/torchax/export.py#L23
Now, the challenge is for dynamo to be able to 1. produce the graph; and 2. n not incur any data copies in this process.
Consider this following pseudocode:
class Tensor:
_data: jax.Array
def __torch_dispatch__(...):
# do stuff with _data, get new data
return Tensor(new_data)
def dynamo_backend(fx, sample):
compiled = compile fx into graph that manipulate jax.Array.
def returned_callable(inputs):
datas = [i._data for i in inputs]
res = compiled(*datas)
return TensorSubclass(res)
return returned_callable
model = torch.compile(model, backend = dynamo_backend)
inputs = a list of TensorSubclass or a list of torch.Tensor?
model(*inputs)
What would be the type of inputs?
If inputs are of type TensorSubclass
, then dynamo
will attempt to trace through the __torch_dispatch__
method,
and throws error because it doesn't know what is _data
and the
operations on it.
If inputs
is of type torch.Tensor
, then it works: dynamo
calls the backend, the backend can produce correct result.
But, inputs
need to be converted to TensorSubclass
first inside of
the backend; which usually means a data copy. This happens everytime
the compiled backend is executed, therefore not desirable.
When tracing dynamo treats TensorSubclass as if it is a regular tensor
without dispatch override; and when executing the compiled callable,
TensorSubclass is passed in as-is. We know that dynamo can do this with
some tensor subclass, namely FakeTensor
.
Let's list out the possible ways we could accomplish this behavior.
Roughly we would have a Tensor
subclass in C++, this is very
similar to the LazyTensor
subclass that is the current XLATensor
.
This tensor can hold it's own states in C++. In our case, that would
be a PyObject*
that happens to point to either jnp.ndarray
or
jax's Traced<ShapedArray>
during jax.jit. We might further result the
XLA
dispatch key to route the operators to the jax implementation,
emulating what __torch_dispatch__
does.
This way, eager mode will continue to work, and dynamo would work
because the Python class is still torch.Tensor
(not a subclass), and
there are no Python logic in dispatching so dynamo cannot trace through.
- Very clear that this will work.
- Recommended by ezyang
Now need to deal with C++ builds. In particular, torch
becomes a source
dependency instead of a pip dependency; meaning, again we need to start
building torch first then build torchax. This might be mitigated if
that subclass can be upstreamed.
We have one instance where a torch.Tensor
dispatch subclass
just works with dynamo, without dynamo make a fuss when it traces
__torch_dispatch__
. This is FakeTensor
. (https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/pull/100017/files)
The idea is to make dynamo trace as-if the inputs are FakeTensor
and
not XLATensor
. and only after the creation of fx graph and backend, dynamo
calls the compiled callable with XLATensor
.
Pros:
- Likely pure python changes.
Cons:
- We also need to design a mechanism to represent tensor subclasses that is desirable for dynamo to trace through, and those is not.
- Likely significant amount of work.
So currently dynamo traces __torch_dispatch__
, and we don't like that
because it will find the operations on Jax arrays, and doesn't understand those.
What if we make dynamo able to understand what is inside? The Black box python functions doc points the possibility of registering things that we don't want dynamo to go into as a custom op. So we could, theoretically do the following:
- Register the jax impl of an Aten op as a custom op.
i.e. register
jaten.add
foraten.add
. - For meta kernels, just call the meta kernel of
aten.add
. - In
__torch_dispatch__
, we forward the call fromaten.add
tojaten.add
.
When dynamo attempts to go inside of __torch_dispatch__
, it will find
jaten.add
. Then it will record that in the fx.Graph
.
Our backend will see the same ops but in a different namespace (jaten
).
That is fine as long as we know how to look up its implementation.
Note: we probably also need to hook up gradients of custom ops via. autograph.Function
.
Pros / Cons: Haven't tried, don't know if it gonna work or not.
class Subclass(torch.Tensor):
@staticmethod
def __new__(cls, elem):
dtype = tensor.j2t_dtype(elem.dtype)
shape = list(elem.shape)
for i, s in enumerate(shape):
if not isinstance(s, int):
shape[i] = 1
if dtype is None:
dtype = torch.float32
self = torch.Tensor._make_wrapper_subclass(
cls,
shape,
dtype=dtype,
device='meta',
requires_grad=False,
)
self._meta = torch.empty(
shape, dtype=dtype, device='meta', requires_grad=False
)
self._elem = elem
return self
def __init__(self, elem: jax.Array):
super().__init__()
self._elem = elem
def __str__(self):
return "Subclass({} {})".format(str(type(self._elem)), str(self._elem))
This fails with an error saying that exhausted subclasses and all the __torch_dispatch__
returned NotImplemented
.