-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 897
Bug fix: eval OOM due to deepcopy of torch model #5607
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?
Conversation
…` in TaskConfig during eval
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.
Summary of Changes
Hello @hellopahe, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!
This pull request addresses an Out-Of-Memory (OOM) issue that occurs when evalscope
attempts to deep-copy large torch
model tensors during evaluation. The solution involves implementing a lightweight in-process registry to store model references, allowing evalscope
to work with a small identifier instead of the entire model object, thereby preventing excessive memory consumption and improving evaluation stability.
Highlights
- Memory Optimization: Introduced a lightweight in-process registry to store
torch
model objects and templates, preventing Out-Of-Memory (OOM) errors caused byevalscope
deep-copying large model tensors. - Registry API: Added
register_eval_model
,get_eval_model
, andunregister_eval_model
functions inswift/llm/eval/utils.py
to manage the lifecycle of registered models. - EvalScope Integration: Modified the
_evalscope_eval
method to register the current model and template with a unique key, passing only this lightweightmodel_ref
toevalscope
'sTaskConfig
instead of the fulltorch
model object. - Safe Cleanup: Ensured that registered models are unregistered using a
try...finally
block, guaranteeing cleanup even if evaluation fails.
Using Gemini Code Assist
The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.
Invoking Gemini
You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command>
or @gemini-code-assist <command>
. Below is a summary of the supported commands.
Feature | Command | Description |
---|---|---|
Code Review | /gemini review |
Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state. |
Pull Request Summary | /gemini summary |
Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state. |
Comment | @gemini-code-assist | Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments. |
Help | /gemini help |
Displays a list of available commands. |
Customization
To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/
folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.
Limitations & Feedback
Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.
You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.
Footnotes
-
Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩
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.
Code Review
This pull request addresses an Out-Of-Memory error during evaluation by introducing an in-process registry to avoid deep-copying large model tensors. The approach of passing a model reference instead of the model object is sound. My review focuses on improving the robustness and thread-safety of this new registry mechanism. I've suggested making the registry thread-safe to prevent potential race conditions, ensuring the model keys are unique across different trainer instances, and adding a check to handle cases where a model is not found in the registry to prevent crashes.
PR type
Issues and fixes
Reproduce