- 
                Notifications
    You must be signed in to change notification settings 
- Fork 52
          Improve description of device handling, add array.to_device
          #171
        
          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
          
     Merged
      
      
    
  
     Merged
                    Changes from all commits
      Commits
    
    
  File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
          Failed to load comments.   
        
        
          
      Loading
        
  Jump to
        
          Jump to file
        
      
      
          Failed to load files.   
        
        
          
      Loading
        
  Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
  
    
      This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
      Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
    
  
  
    
              
  
    
      This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
      Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
    
  
  
    
              
              | Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change | 
|---|---|---|
|  | @@ -4,12 +4,15 @@ | |
|  | ||
| For libraries that support execution on more than a single hardware device - e.g. CPU and GPU, or multiple GPUs - it is important to be able to control on which device newly created arrays get placed and where execution happens. Attempting to be fully implicit doesn't always scale well to situations with multiple GPUs. | ||
|  | ||
| Existing libraries employ one or more of these three methods to exert such control: | ||
| Existing libraries employ one or more of these three methods to exert such control over data placement: | ||
|  | ||
| 1. A global default device, which may be fixed or user-switchable. | ||
| 2. A context manager to control device assignment within its scope. | ||
| 3. Local control via explicit keywords and a method to transfer arrays to another device. | ||
| 3. Local control for data allocation target device via explicit keywords, and a method to transfer arrays to another device. | ||
|  | ||
| Libraries differ in how execution is controlled, via a context manager or with the convention that execution takes place on the same device where all argument arrays are allocated. And they may or may not allow mixing arrays on different devices via implicit data transfers. | ||
|  | ||
| This standard chooses to add support for method 3 (local control), because it's the most explicit and granular, with its only downside being verbosity. A context manager may be added in the future - see {ref}`device-out-of-scope` for details. | ||
| This standard chooses to add support for method 3 (local control), with the convention that execution takes place on the same device where all argument arrays are allocated. The rationale for choosing method 3 is because it's the most explicit and granular, with its only downside being verbosity. A context manager may be added in the future - see {ref}`device-out-of-scope` for details. | ||
| There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Just to clarify: for libraries that follow this convention, it would be an error to perform an operation with tensors that are not all allocated on the same device? | ||
|  | ||
|  | ||
| ## Intended usage | ||
|  | ||
  Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
  This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
  Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
  Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
  Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
  Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
  Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
  You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
  Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
  This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
  Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
  Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
  Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
  Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
  
    
  
    
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
If
selfis already ondevice, do we expect a no-op (returningself) or a copy?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.
Good point, should specify that. I'd say no-op.