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

ttnn.div_bw unary inconsistent documentation regarding input tensors layout #13854

Closed
Tracked by #13795
amalbasaTT opened this issue Oct 16, 2024 · 1 comment
Closed
Tracked by #13795

Comments

@amalbasaTT
Copy link
Contributor

amalbasaTT commented Oct 16, 2024

ttnn.div_bw doesn't support ROW_MAJOR layout despite what it says in the documentation. When one or both of the input tensors has ROW_MAJOR layout, the FATAL error "Inputs to eltwise binary must be tilized" is thrown.

To Reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:
Sweep test for div_bw is located in 'tests/sweep_framework/sweeps/eltwise/unary_backward/div_bw/div_bw.py'

  1. Go to 'tests/sweep_framework/sweeps/eltwise/unary_backward/div_bw/div_bw.py'
  2. Remove next lines of code from the invalidate_vector function:
    if test_vector["input_layout"] == ttnn.ROW_MAJOR_LAYOUT:
        return True, "Inputs to eltwise binary must be tilized"
  1. Generate new parameter vectors and run the sweep test
python3 tests/sweep_framework/sweeps_parameter_generator.py --elastic cloud --module-name eltwise.unary_backward.div_bw.div_bw
python3 tests/sweep_framework/sweeps_runner.py --elastic cloud --module-name eltwise.unary_backward.div_bw.div_bw 
  1. See error. Results can be found on elastic cloud as explained here: https://github.com/tenstorrent/tt-metal/tree/main/tests/sweep_framework

Expected behavior
For vectors with grad_layout and input_a_layout being ROW_MAJOR_LAYOUT, test will fail with the message "inputs to eltwise binary must be tilized"

@KalaivaniMCW
Copy link
Contributor

Updated doc
image

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants