-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 31.5k
[CI] Fixing some AMD failures #42879
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?
[CI] Fixing some AMD failures #42879
Conversation
|
The docs for this PR live here. All of your documentation changes will be reflected on that endpoint. The docs are available until 30 days after the last update. |
remi-or
left a comment
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.
A comment (repeated twice) to address + I will run the slow tests
|
|
||
| else: | ||
| batch_size, seq_length, _ = inputs_embeds.shape | ||
| batch_size, seq_length = input_ids.shape |
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 think input_ids are optional, as is input_embeds -- is there an argument that is not that we could infer those dimensions with? Otherwise I think one of the two inputs_needs to not beNone, so we can get the dims from whichever is notNone`
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.
Okay, let's do that. We'll try to get the dimensions from input_embeds. If they are None (as was the case for some failing tests), we will then try to infer them from input_ids.
|
|
||
| else: | ||
| batch_size, seq_length, _ = inputs_embeds.shape | ||
| batch_size, seq_length = input_ids.shape |
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.
same as above
| out = model(input_ids).logits.float().cpu() | ||
| # Expected mean on dim = -1 | ||
| EXPECTED_MEAN = torch.tensor([[-1.9537, -1.6193, -1.4123, -1.4673, -1.8511, -1.9309, -1.9826, -2.1776]]) | ||
| EXPECTED_MEAN = torch.tensor([[-2.2121, -1.6335, -1.4816, -1.5035, -1.9110, -1.8979, -1.9682, -2.1980]]) |
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 will run the slow test to see if this does not break things on CUDA, otherwise you should add Expectations
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.
Yes. I remember checking the Nvidia CI, they were the same expectation outputs. But let's see for these exepected means.
|
run-slow: qwen2, qwen2_5_omni, qwen2_5_vl |
|
This comment contains models: ["models/qwen2", "models/qwen2_5_omni", "models/qwen2_5_vl"] |
CI Results✅ No failing test specific to this PR 🎉 ! |
ae6c74a to
88c323d
Compare
88c323d to
76ebf07
Compare
|
[For maintainers] Suggested jobs to run (before merge) run-slow: qwen2, qwen2_5_omni, qwen2_5_vl |
This PR fixes several failures on AMD for Qwen2, Qwen2.5-Omni, and Qwen2.5-VL.