| Dynamic Parallelism in TorchScript |
| ================================== |
|
|
| In this tutorial, we introduce the syntax for doing *dynamic inter-op parallelism* |
| in TorchScript. This parallelism has the following properties: |
|
|
| * dynamic - The number of parallel tasks created and their workload can depend on the control flow of the program. |
| * inter-op - The parallelism is concerned with running TorchScript program fragments in parallel. This is distinct from *intra-op parallelism*, which is concerned with splitting up individual operators and running subsets of the operator's work in parallel. |
| Basic Syntax |
| ------------ |
|
|
| The two important APIs for dynamic parallelism are: |
|
|
| * ``torch.jit.fork(fn : Callable[..., T], *args, **kwargs) -> torch.jit.Future[T]`` |
| * ``torch.jit.wait(fut : torch.jit.Future[T]) -> T`` |
|
|
| A good way to demonstrate how these work is by way of an example: |
|
|
| .. code-block:: python |
|
|
| import torch |
|
|
| def foo(x): |
| return torch.neg(x) |
|
|
| @torch.jit.script |
| def example(x): |
| # Call `foo` using parallelism: |
| # First, we "fork" off a task. This task will run `foo` with argument `x` |
| future = torch.jit.fork(foo, x) |
|
|
| # Call `foo` normally |
| x_normal = foo(x) |
|
|
| # Second, we "wait" on the task. Since the task may be running in |
| # parallel, we have to "wait" for its result to become available. |
| # Notice that by having lines of code between the "fork()" and "wait()" |
| # call for a given Future, we can overlap computations so that they |
| # run in parallel. |
| x_parallel = torch.jit.wait(future) |
|
|
| return x_normal, x_parallel |
|
|
| print(example(torch.ones(1))) # (-1., -1.) |
|
|
|
|
| ``fork()`` takes the callable ``fn`` and arguments to that callable ``args`` |
| and ``kwargs`` and creates an asynchronous task for the execution of ``fn``. |
| ``fn`` can be a function, method, or Module instance. ``fork()`` returns a |
| reference to the value of the result of this execution, called a ``Future``. |
| Because ``fork`` returns immediately after creating the async task, ``fn`` may |
| not have been executed by the time the line of code after the ``fork()`` call |
| is executed. Thus, ``wait()`` is used to wait for the async task to complete |
| and return the value. |
|
|
| These constructs can be used to overlap the execution of statements within a |
| function (shown in the worked example section) or be composed with other language |
| constructs like loops: |
|
|
| .. code-block:: python |
|
|
| import torch |
| from typing import List |
|
|
| def foo(x): |
| return torch.neg(x) |
|
|
| @torch.jit.script |
| def example(x): |
| futures : List[torch.jit.Future[torch.Tensor]] = [] |
| for _ in range(100): |
| futures.append(torch.jit.fork(foo, x)) |
|
|
| results = [] |
| for future in futures: |
| results.append(torch.jit.wait(future)) |
|
|
| return torch.sum(torch.stack(results)) |
|
|
| print(example(torch.ones([]))) |
|
|
| .. note:: |
|
|
| When we initialized an empty list of Futures, we needed to add an explicit |
| type annotation to ``futures``. In TorchScript, empty containers default |
| to assuming they contain Tensor values, so we annotate the list constructor |
| # as being of type ``List[torch.jit.Future[torch.Tensor]]`` |
|
|
| This example uses ``fork()`` to launch 100 instances of the function ``foo``, |
| waits on the 100 tasks to complete, then sums the results, returning ``-100.0``. |
|
|
| Applied Example: Ensemble of Bidirectional LSTMs |
| ------------------------------------------------ |
|
|
| Let's try to apply parallelism to a more realistic example and see what sort |
| of performance we can get out of it. First, let's define the baseline model: an |
| ensemble of bidirectional LSTM layers. |
|
|
| .. code-block:: python |
|
|
| import torch, time |
|
|
| # In RNN parlance, the dimensions we care about are: |
| # # of time-steps (T) |
| # Batch size (B) |
| # Hidden size/number of "channels" (C) |
| T, B, C = 50, 50, 1024 |
|
|
| # A module that defines a single "bidirectional LSTM". This is simply two |
| # LSTMs applied to the same sequence, but one in reverse |
| class BidirectionalRecurrentLSTM(torch.nn.Module): |
| def __init__(self): |
| super().__init__() |
| self.cell_f = torch.nn.LSTM(input_size=C, hidden_size=C) |
| self.cell_b = torch.nn.LSTM(input_size=C, hidden_size=C) |
|
|
| def forward(self, x : torch.Tensor) -> torch.Tensor: |
| # Forward layer |
| output_f, _ = self.cell_f(x) |
|
|
| # Backward layer. Flip input in the time dimension (dim 0), apply the |
| # layer, then flip the outputs in the time dimension |
| x_rev = torch.flip(x, dims=[0]) |
| output_b, _ = self.cell_b(torch.flip(x, dims=[0])) |
| output_b_rev = torch.flip(output_b, dims=[0]) |
|
|
| return torch.cat((output_f, output_b_rev), dim=2) |
|
|
|
|
| # An "ensemble" of `BidirectionalRecurrentLSTM` modules. The modules in the |
| # ensemble are run one-by-one on the same input then their results are |
| # stacked and summed together, returning the combined result. |
| class LSTMEnsemble(torch.nn.Module): |
| def __init__(self, n_models): |
| super().__init__() |
| self.n_models = n_models |
| self.models = torch.nn.ModuleList([ |
| BidirectionalRecurrentLSTM() for _ in range(self.n_models)]) |
|
|
| def forward(self, x : torch.Tensor) -> torch.Tensor: |
| results = [] |
| for model in self.models: |
| results.append(model(x)) |
| return torch.stack(results).sum(dim=0) |
|
|
| # For a head-to-head comparison to what we're going to do with fork/wait, let's |
| # instantiate the model and compile it with TorchScript |
| ens = torch.jit.script(LSTMEnsemble(n_models=4)) |
|
|
| # Normally you would pull this input out of an embedding table, but for the |
| # purpose of this demo let's just use random data. |
| x = torch.rand(T, B, C) |
|
|
| # Let's run the model once to warm up things like the memory allocator |
| ens(x) |
|
|
| x = torch.rand(T, B, C) |
|
|
| # Let's see how fast it runs! |
| s = time.time() |
| ens(x) |
| print('Inference took', time.time() - s, ' seconds') |
|
|
| On my machine, this network runs in ``2.05`` seconds. We can do a lot better! |
|
|
| Parallelizing Forward and Backward Layers |
| ----------------------------------------- |
|
|
| A very simple thing we can do is parallelize the forward and backward layers |
| within ``BidirectionalRecurrentLSTM``. For this, the structure of the computation |
| is static, so we don't actually even need any loops. Let's rewrite the ``forward`` |
| method of ``BidirectionalRecurrentLSTM`` like so: |
|
|
| .. code-block:: python |
|
|
| def forward(self, x : torch.Tensor) -> torch.Tensor: |
| # Forward layer - fork() so this can run in parallel to the backward |
| # layer |
| future_f = torch.jit.fork(self.cell_f, x) |
|
|
| # Backward layer. Flip input in the time dimension (dim 0), apply the |
| # layer, then flip the outputs in the time dimension |
| x_rev = torch.flip(x, dims=[0]) |
| output_b, _ = self.cell_b(torch.flip(x, dims=[0])) |
| output_b_rev = torch.flip(output_b, dims=[0]) |
|
|
| # Retrieve the output from the forward layer. Note this needs to happen |
| # *after* the stuff we want to parallelize with |
| output_f, _ = torch.jit.wait(future_f) |
|
|
| return torch.cat((output_f, output_b_rev), dim=2) |
|
|
| In this example, ``forward()`` delegates execution of ``cell_f`` to another thread, |
| while it continues to execute ``cell_b``. This causes the execution of both the |
| cells to be overlapped with each other. |
|
|
| Running the script again with this simple modification yields a runtime of |
| ``1.71`` seconds for an improvement of ``17%``! |
|
|
| Aside: Visualizing Parallelism |
| ------------------------------ |
|
|
| We're not done optimizing our model but it's worth introducing the tooling we |
| have for visualizing performance. One important tool is the `PyTorch profiler <https://pytorch.org/docs/stable/autograd.html#profiler>`_. |
|
|
| Let's use the profiler along with the Chrome trace export functionality to |
| visualize the performance of our parallelized model: |
|
|
| .. code-block:: python |
| with torch.autograd.profiler.profile() as prof: |
| ens(x) |
| prof.export_chrome_trace('parallel.json') |
|
|
| This snippet of code will write out a file named ``parallel.json``. If you |
| navigate Google Chrome to ``chrome://tracing``, click the ``Load`` button, and |
| load in that JSON file, you should see a timeline like the following: |
|
|
| .. image:: https://i.imgur.com/rm5hdG9.png |
|
|
| The horizontal axis of the timeline represents time and the vertical axis |
| represents threads of execution. As we can see, we are running two ``lstm`` |
| instances at a time. This is the result of our hard work parallelizing the |
| bidirectional layers! |
|
|
| Parallelizing Models in the Ensemble |
| ------------------------------------ |
|
|
| You may have noticed that there is a further parallelization opportunity in our |
| code: we can also run the models contained in ``LSTMEnsemble`` in parallel with |
| each other. The way to do that is simple enough, this is how we should change |
| the ``forward`` method of ``LSTMEnsemble``: |
|
|
| .. code-block:: python |
|
|
| def forward(self, x : torch.Tensor) -> torch.Tensor: |
| # Launch tasks for each model |
| futures : List[torch.jit.Future[torch.Tensor]] = [] |
| for model in self.models: |
| futures.append(torch.jit.fork(model, x)) |
|
|
| # Collect the results from the launched tasks |
| results : List[torch.Tensor] = [] |
| for future in futures: |
| results.append(torch.jit.wait(future)) |
|
|
| return torch.stack(results).sum(dim=0) |
|
|
| Or, if you value brevity, we can use list comprehensions: |
|
|
| .. code-block:: python |
|
|
| def forward(self, x : torch.Tensor) -> torch.Tensor: |
| futures = [torch.jit.fork(model, x) for model in self.models] |
| results = [torch.jit.wait(fut) for fut in futures] |
| return torch.stack(results).sum(dim=0) |
|
|
| Like described in the intro, we've used loops to fork off tasks for each of the |
| models in our ensemble. We've then used another loop to wait for all of the |
| tasks to be completed. This provides even more overlap of computation. |
|
|
| With this small update, the script runs in ``1.4`` seconds, for a total speedup |
| of ``32%``! Pretty good for two lines of code. |
|
|
| We can also use the Chrome tracer again to see where's going on: |
|
|
| .. image:: https://i.imgur.com/kA0gyQm.png |
|
|
| We can now see that all ``LSTM`` instances are being run fully in parallel. |
|
|
| Conclusion |
| ---------- |
|
|
| In this tutorial, we learned about ``fork()`` and ``wait()``, the basic APIs |
| for doing dynamic, inter-op parallelism in TorchScript. We saw a few typical |
| usage patterns for using these functions to parallelize the execution of |
| functions, methods, or ``Modules`` in TorchScript code. Finally, we worked through |
| an example of optimizing a model using this technique and explored the performance |
| measurement and visualization tooling available in PyTorch. |
|
|