There is currently no int16 quantization support in torch. This patch
adds a new mlir type to correspond to the missing "torch.qint16" type,
and enables lowering of quantization-related onnx ops using int16 types.
In follow-up patches, custom quantization logic for ops like
aten.matmul/aten.mm/aten.convolution may need to be revisited to allow
support for qint16. The passes in FuseQuantizedOps.cpp may also need
slight modifications.
This addresses 7 of the model failures I'm seeing in the test suite. See
[Shark-Turbine issue
#566](https://github.com/nod-ai/SHARK-Turbine/issues/566).
Need the op ```linalg.conv_2d_ngchw_gfchw_q``` to be added upstream
before merging this. See [llvm-project PR #92136
](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92136).
A small additional expansion to operand quantization is included in this
patch to address a model failure that occurs when unblocking the
quantized group convolutions in one of these onnx models.
This PR fixes the bugs for `Torch::AtenOneHotOp` by:
1) Using `Torch::kUnknownSize` as the default value for `numClasses` in
the pattern matching stage in `DecomposeAtenOneHotOp`
2) Adding `AtenIntScalarOp` to the patterns in `TorchToArith`
3) Handling both `int` and `float` types for `off` and `on` values in
`TorchOnnxToTorch` conversion
It also includes:
1) A new test in `TorchToArith/basic.mlir`, for `torch.aten.Int.Scalar`,
and
2) A new test in `decompose-complex-ops.mlir`, for `torch.aten.one_hot`
**Dependencies**
This PR is dependent on #3334.
I am trying to eliminate 'getWithLeastStaticInformation' in
DecomposeAtenTriuOp. Could you provide me with some suggestions?
@qingyunqu @zjgarvey
See issue https://github.com/llvm/torch-mlir/issues/3312
Discord Thread:
https://discord.com/channels/636084430946959380/1238330633328005243
## Context:
[This](https://github.com/llvm/torch-mlir/blob/main/python/torch_mlir/fx.py#L61)
was updated to support e2e tests for the TorchDynamo frontend in
Torch-MLIR, where we run FX decompositions and import the FX IR to
generate Torch dialect, followed by
`torch-function-to-torch-backend-pipeline`, skipping only the shape/type
refinement for now. However, we should be able to skip many of the torch
simplification passes, as depicted in the [frontend
roadmap](https://github.com/llvm/torch-mlir/blob/main/docs/images/roadmap_frontend.png).
Based on IREE's TorchDynamo
[pipeline](https://github.com/iree-org/iree/blob/main/compiler/plugins/input/Torch/InputConversion/Passes.cpp#L29),
the only two passes we seem to require are: `ReduceOpVariantsPass` and
`DecomposeComplexOpsPass`. This is inline with our findings as well
based on initial exploration.
This PR creates a dedicated frontend simplification pipeline for
TorchDynamo / FX Importer which calls only `ReduceOpVariantsPass` and
`DecomposeComplexOpsPass`. We rely on the e2e fx_importer tests to
ensure we're not regressing by removing many of the passes that were
historically needed for TorchScript.
One notable change here is that we do not call the
`LowerToBackendContractPass` anymore, which used to call
`TorchSimplificationPipeline` iteratively until VerifyBackendContract
was clean. Some of this was required for the shape/type refinement to
converge, which seems a non-issue for Dynamo frontend. Do we anticipate
this (the iterative invocation of TorchSimplificationPipeline followed
by VerifyBackendContract) to be worth retaining in the Dynamo frontend
pipeline? If so, I can make those changes, PLMK.
After running the model tests in SHARK-TestSuite, I noticed a few model
failures due to half-fusion.
Notably, RDN_pytorch_vaiq_int8 had a depth=5 convolution chain with
multiple AtenViewOp's.
This change enables more customization with operand quantization, and
generalizes the patterns QuantizeOperands and QuantizeTransposeOperands
to QuantizeOperandsPastCommutingOps.
This allows for passing quantization through operations which are
functionally unaffected by quantization, such as view-like ops. The
purpose of this change is to address a myriad of quantization issues
seen in quantized onnx models that have some reshape-like operations
sandwiched in between a dequant and something like a matmul (whose other
operand is immediately quantizable).
This is part 1 of ~3, formatting all miscellaneous text files and CPP files matched by a first run of pre-commit. These tend to be low change-traffic and are likely not disruptive.
Subsequent patches will format Python files and remaining CPP files.
A choice was made to quantize the return type of Relu with a scale and
zero point copied from the input's quantization scheme. With this
choice, the torch-to-linalg conversion of quantized Relu essentially
computes max(input, zeroPoint) in the elementwise payload.
Decomposition RepeatInterleaveSelfInt with following ops:
```python
def my_repeat_interleave(input, repeats, dim=None):
if dim is None:
# Flatten the input and then repeat
return input.flatten().unsqueeze(-1).tile((1, repeats)).flatten()
else:
# Calculate the shape after repeat
expanded_shape = list(input.shape)
expanded_shape[dim] *= repeats
# Repeat the tensor along the specified dimension
repeat_shape = [1] * (input.dim() + 1)
repeat_shape[dim + 1] = repeats
input = input.unsqueeze(-1)
# Tile and then reshape
tiled = torch.tile(input, repeat_shape)
# Rearrange and reshape
repeated = tiled.reshape(*expanded_shape)
return repeated
```
I passed the tests of stablehlo and linalg. When testing onnx, strange
things happened.
In torch-mlir's CI **torch_nightly** and my own
environment(torch==2.4.0.dev20240318+cpu), it can **pass the pass**.
In torch-mlir's CI **torch_stable**, it **failed**.
The test case is `RepeatInterleaveSelfIntNoDimModule_basic`, the result
shape should be [120].
```python
class RepeatInterleaveSelfIntNoDimModule(torch.nn.Module):
def __init__(self):
super().__init__()
@export
@annotate_args([
None,
([3, 4, 5], torch.float32, True),
])
def forward(self, x):
return x.repeat_interleave(2)
@register_test_case(module_factory=lambda: RepeatInterleaveSelfIntNoDimModule())
def RepeatInterleaveSelfIntNoDimModule_basic(module, tu: TestUtils):
module.forward(tu.rand(3, 4, 5))
```
The error log is as follows:
```
Unexpected outcome summary: (onnx)
****** Failed tests - 1 tests
FAIL - "RepeatInterleaveSelfIntNoDimModule_basic"
@ trace item #0 - call to "forward"
@ output of call to "forward"
ERROR: shape (torch.Size([6, 4, 5])) is not equal to golden shape (torch.Size([120]))
```
@rsuderman
Would you please help me check what's wrong with my PR? Thanks a lot.
1. onnx.MatMulInteger now converts to aten.matmul instead of aten.mm
2. aten.matmul, for ranks >=2, now allows quantized inputs and will
lower to linalg::quantized_matmul or linalg::quantized_batch_matmul.
3. added AtenMatmulOp to the FuseQuantizeOps rewrite patters
QuantizeOperands, QuantizeTransposedOperands, and QuantizeAccumulator
4. added several tests, including some to test AtenMmOp with varying
quantization signed-ness.
5. a quantized matmul mat-vec test is added to verify the failure to
lower to linalg; cleaned of out-of-date code related to common
torch-mlir lowering xfails.
6. in debugging a real model with quantized matmuls, I found a bug on
the scalarize-shapes pass which resulted from the aten.full op folder
returning an incompatible result type. This is fixed by the small change
here to
[lib/Dialect/Torch/IR/TorchOps.cpp](https://github.com/llvm/torch-mlir/compare/main...zjgarvey:torch-mlir:MatMulIntegerFix?expand=1#diff-dc8ed165c207918e606490eee3984b1ad51d7034e6aac36fc046bf47f6f03f4f).
- Added linalg lowering for `AtenFloorDivideScalarOp`
- Needed `AtenDivScalarModeOp` for the decomp.
- Added linalg lowering for `AtenDivScalarModeOp`
- Moved linalg payload logic to `createDivModePayload()` since the logic
was nearly identical for both `AtenDivScalarModeOp` and
`AtenDivTensorModeOp`. Just a template function
- Added `AtenDivScalarModeOp` lowering for stablehlo
Pytorch's
[`torch.floor_divide()`](https://pytorch.org/docs/stable/generated/torch.floor_divide.html)
in a previous version (for a reason unknown to me) preformed a
truncation instead of "floor". The already implemented op
`AtenFloorDivideTensorOp` was done before this change. However, this
wasn't caught because our testcases only tested positive floor division.
I changed this to floor as well as adding a few test cases.
Previously, it could only handle the situations where outputsize == (1,
1) or outputsize == (input_H, input_W). Now it supports all situations
where input_H % output_H== 0 && input_W % output_W == 0
ptrifunovic98
Xinyu Yang
Vinayak Dev
Lei Zhang
zjgarvey
Vivek Khandelwal
Rob Suderman
Yuanqiang Liu
penguin_wwy
Angel Zhang
Sambhav Jain
Peiming Liu
NeverRaR
aldesilv
Jiawei Wu
Xida Ren (Cedar)
Stella Laurenzo
IanWood1
