Skip to content

Add TorchAO wrapper config to allow filter_fn for quantize_ #13264

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

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

abhinaykukkadapu
Copy link
Contributor

@abhinaykukkadapu abhinaykukkadapu commented Aug 10, 2025

Changes:

  1. Support filter function in quantize_ function when using torchao quantize.
  2. Update unittests accordingly
  3. Use ComposableQuantizer if there are multiple quantizers and is of type torchao, for legacy quantizers use them directly with prepare_pt2e.
  4. Source transform modifies model inplace, so deep copy first to avoid modifying user provided model.

[ghstack-poisoned]
@abhinaykukkadapu
Copy link
Contributor Author

abhinaykukkadapu commented Aug 10, 2025

Copy link

pytorch-bot bot commented Aug 10, 2025

🔗 Helpful Links

🧪 See artifacts and rendered test results at hud.pytorch.org/pr/pytorch/executorch/13264

Note: Links to docs will display an error until the docs builds have been completed.

❌ 5 New Failures

As of commit 7dab762 with merge base a84b3c9 (image):

NEW FAILURES - The following jobs have failed:

This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI and updates every 15 minutes.

@meta-cla meta-cla bot added the CLA Signed This label is managed by the Facebook bot. Authors need to sign the CLA before a PR can be reviewed. label Aug 10, 2025
Copy link

This PR needs a release notes: label

If your change should be included in the release notes (i.e. would users of this library care about this change?), please use a label starting with release notes:. This helps us keep track and include your important work in the next release notes.

To add a label, you can comment to pytorchbot, for example
@pytorchbot label "release notes: none"

For more information, see
https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/wiki/PyTorch-AutoLabel-Bot#why-categorize-for-release-notes-and-how-does-it-work.

[ghstack-poisoned]
[ghstack-poisoned]
[ghstack-poisoned]
eager_quantized_model = source_transform_output.data["forward"]
output = session.run_method("forward", example_inputs[0])[0]
expected = eager_quantized_model(*example_inputs[0])
self.assertTrue(torch.allclose(output, expected, atol=atol))
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You might want to print more stats if this fails - see https://github.com/pytorch/executorch/blob/main/backends/test/harness/tester.py#L337

atol=1e-1,
)
self._compare_eager_quantized_model_outputs(
session, example_inputs, 1e-1
Copy link
Contributor

@digantdesai digantdesai Aug 12, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

atol? Why is this so high for two linears?

Suggested change
session, example_inputs, 1e-1
session, example_inputs, atol=1e-1

Copy link
Contributor Author

@abhinaykukkadapu abhinaykukkadapu Aug 12, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, i think 1e-2 is working on my mac, will check if linux passes on CI. Nevertheless, i'm updating the tolerance tests similar to CoreML (let me know if there is any objection) to use sqnr to compare eager model vs lowered model output.

But use tolerance checks to compare post quantized model and lowered model.

config = Int8DynamicActivationIntxWeightConfig(
weight_dtype=weight_dtype,
weight_granularity=weight_granularity,
config = AOQuantizationConfig(
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

assert weight_dtype == torch.int4 because XNNPACK doesn't support anything but 4 for groupwise. For channelwise it can do both int4 and int8.

# Multiple torchao quantizers - use ComposableQuantizer
from torchao.quantization.pt2e.quantizer import ComposableQuantizer

return ComposableQuantizer(torchao_pt2e_quantizers)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

test for this?

raise ValueError("Mixed quantizer types are not supported")
if len(torch_ao_quantizers) > 1:
raise ValueError(
"Multiple quantizers of torch.ao.quantization.quantizer not supported"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Doesn't torchao already detect this and give an error if mixing? I thought I added that

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

May be the torchao version is different?

@@ -331,6 +330,38 @@ def valid_predecessor_stages(self) -> List["StageType"]:
def can_start_pipeline(self) -> bool:
return True

def _get_quantizer_for_prepare_pt2e(self, quantizers: List[Any]):
torch_ao_quantizers = []
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I want to make sure this API does not invite people to use torch.ao quantizers.

We've migrated to torchao quantizers in ET and torch.ao will be deprecated. The only backend that uses torch.ao in ET right now is CoreML (because it has an external depedency on coremltools adopting the torchao quantizer)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I can create a follow up ticket to deprecate torch.ao support, once coreml moves to torchao. Currently we already support both torch.ao and torchao via prepare_pt2e's backward compatibility anyway.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I guess this is a private method, so maybe it's OK. I just want to make sure we aren't exposing this publicly

@metascroy
Copy link
Contributor

Overall, looks good. Address comments before merging

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
CLA Signed This label is managed by the Facebook bot. Authors need to sign the CLA before a PR can be reviewed.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants