Properly set mutable buffer lifespans #12182
Merged
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/pytorch/executorch/12182
Note: Links to docs will display an error until the docs builds have been completed. ❌ 1 New Failure, 2 Cancelled Jobs, 1 Unrelated FailureAs of commit 9b43c7f with merge base 45d7520 ( NEW FAILURE - The following job has failed:
CANCELLED JOBS - The following jobs were cancelled. Please retry:
FLAKY - The following job failed but was likely due to flakiness present on trunk:
This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI and updates every 15 minutes. |
facebook-github-bot
added
the
CLA Signed
Contributor
|
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D77618047 |
This PR needs a
|
larryliu0820
approved these changes
Jul 2, 2025
JacobSzwejbka
added a commit
to JacobSzwejbka/executorch-1
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 2, 2025
Summary: Earlier iterations of mutable buffer memory planning relied on the insert copy_ pass to inject the placeholder node as the output. That is pretty hacky and doesn't compose well with the reinplacing pass. Fortunately we already have this pass so we can manually set the lifespan here to be infinite. Reviewed By: nitish2112, larryliu0820 Differential Revision: D77618047
JacobSzwejbka
force-pushed
the
export-D77618047
branch
from
1110b18 to
5b2107f
Compare
JacobSzwejbka
added a commit
to JacobSzwejbka/executorch-1
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 2, 2025
Summary: Earlier iterations of mutable buffer memory planning relied on the insert copy_ pass to inject the placeholder node as the output. That is pretty hacky and doesn't compose well with the reinplacing pass. Fortunately we already have this pass so we can manually set the lifespan here to be infinite. Reviewed By: nitish2112, larryliu0820 Differential Revision: D77618047
JacobSzwejbka
force-pushed
the
export-D77618047
branch
from
5b2107f to
065f3ca
Compare
Contributor
|
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D77618047 |
1 similar comment
Contributor
|
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D77618047 |
JacobSzwejbka
added a commit
to JacobSzwejbka/executorch-1
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 2, 2025
Summary: Pull Request resolved: pytorch#12182 Earlier iterations of mutable buffer memory planning relied on the insert copy_ pass to inject the placeholder node as the output. That is pretty hacky and doesn't compose well with the reinplacing pass. Fortunately we already have this pass so we can manually set the lifespan here to be infinite. Reviewed By: nitish2112, larryliu0820 Differential Revision: D77618047
JacobSzwejbka
force-pushed
the
export-D77618047
branch
from
065f3ca to
305c56e
Compare
JacobSzwejbka
added a commit
to JacobSzwejbka/executorch-1
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 3, 2025
Summary: Earlier iterations of mutable buffer memory planning relied on the insert copy_ pass to inject the placeholder node as the output. That is pretty hacky and doesn't compose well with the reinplacing pass. Fortunately we already have this pass so we can manually set the lifespan here to be infinite. Reviewed By: nitish2112, larryliu0820 Differential Revision: D77618047
JacobSzwejbka
force-pushed
the
export-D77618047
branch
from
305c56e to
30b033c
Compare
Contributor
|
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D77618047 |
Summary: Earlier iterations of mutable buffer memory planning relied on the insert copy_ pass to inject the placeholder node as the output. That is pretty hacky and doesn't compose well with the reinplacing pass. Fortunately we already have this pass so we can manually set the lifespan here to be infinite. Reviewed By: nitish2112, larryliu0820 Differential Revision: D77618047
JacobSzwejbka
force-pushed
the
export-D77618047
branch
from
30b033c to
9b43c7f
Compare
Contributor
|
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D77618047 |
Tanish2101
pushed a commit
to Tanish2101/executorch
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 9, 2025
Differential Revision: D77618047 Pull Request resolved: pytorch#12182
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 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.
Summary: Earlier iterations of mutable buffer memory planning relied on the insert copy_ pass to inject the placeholder node as the output. That is pretty hacky and doesn't compose well with the reinplacing pass. Fortunately we already have this pass so we can manually set the lifespan here to be infinite.
Reviewed By: nitish2112
Differential Revision: D77618047