Skip to content
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

improve(llama): Faster apply_rotary_pos_emb #22785

Merged

Conversation

fpgaminer
Copy link
Contributor

What does this PR do?

Faster implementation for apply_rotary_pos_emb in modeling_llama.py.

Please see issue #22683 for code that verifies the correctness of the change.

NOTE: Not marking as fixing the above issue, as speed is still not as good as before.

Before submitting

  • This PR fixes a typo or improves the docs (you can dismiss the other checks if that's the case).
  • Did you read the contributor guideline,
    Pull Request section?
  • Was this discussed/approved via a Github issue or the forum? Please add a link
    to it if that's the case.
  • Did you make sure to update the documentation with your changes? Here are the
    documentation guidelines, and
    here are tips on formatting docstrings.
  • Did you write any new necessary tests?

Who can review?

Anyone in the community is free to review the PR once the tests have passed. Feel free to tag
members/contributors who may be interested in your PR.

@gante

@HuggingFaceDocBuilderDev
Copy link

HuggingFaceDocBuilderDev commented Apr 15, 2023

The documentation is not available anymore as the PR was closed or merged.

Copy link
Member

@gante gante left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for improving the performance @fpgaminer 🙏

@amyeroberts for context, this comment shows that a) it gets exactly the same numerical output b) it is faster than the previous version

@gante gante requested a review from amyeroberts April 17, 2023 13:39
Copy link
Collaborator

@amyeroberts amyeroberts left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🔥 🔥 🔥 - thanks for updating and for the time to validate and benchmark 🙏

@neggert
Copy link

neggert commented Jul 7, 2023

Should a similar patch be applied to GPT-NeoX?

@amyeroberts
Copy link
Collaborator

@neggert I believe it can be added to GPT-NeoX too - very happy to review a PR if you'd like to add!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants