-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 646
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Stack from ghstack (oldest at bottom): |
🔗 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 FailuresAs of commit 7dab762 with merge base a84b3c9 ( NEW FAILURES - The following jobs have failed:
This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI and updates every 15 minutes. |
This PR needs a
|
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)) |
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.
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 |
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.
atol? Why is this so high for two linears?
session, example_inputs, 1e-1 | |
session, example_inputs, atol=1e-1 |
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.
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( |
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.
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) |
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.
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" |
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.
Doesn't torchao already detect this and give an error if mixing? I thought I added that
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.
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 = [] |
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 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)
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 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.
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 this is a private method, so maybe it's OK. I just want to make sure we aren't exposing this publicly
Overall, looks good. Address comments before merging |
Changes:
ComposableQuantizer
if there are multiple quantizers and is of type torchao, for legacy quantizers use them directly with prepare_pt2e.