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

Fix rosetta pax result tables and cleaned up some dead code paths #496

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jan 29, 2024

Conversation

terrykong
Copy link
Contributor

This PR fixes some issues in reporting that were introduced in #440 . In particular, with the introduction of a non-empty ARTIFACT_NAME in the rosetta tests, the tables no longer were presented correctly:
image

I couldn't find anywhere that used the non-default value of ARTIFACT_NAME, so I removed it in the _test_*_rosetta.yaml files.

This change also cleans up some dead code (EXTRA_TEST_ARGS, EXTRA_GIN_ARGS) since they didn't appear to be used anywhere.

Also the table for rosetta-pax metrics were quite long so I rewrote that to output as a markdown table.

@terrykong
Copy link
Contributor Author

Placed PR into draft until CI passes

ashors1
ashors1 previously approved these changes Jan 25, 2024
@terrykong
Copy link
Contributor Author

presubmit timedout (6hr exceeded). Rerunning manually: https://github.com/NVIDIA/JAX-Toolbox/actions/runs/7687728046

hemildesai
hemildesai previously approved these changes Jan 28, 2024
@terrykong terrykong marked this pull request as ready for review January 29, 2024 06:48
@terrykong terrykong marked this pull request as draft January 29, 2024 06:52
@terrykong terrykong marked this pull request as ready for review January 29, 2024 16:59
@terrykong
Copy link
Contributor Author

The tables appear in different sections, but they are correctly rendered now. I believe we should merge this now since we can at least view failures correctly now. I'll follow up with a fix to the tables appearing in different sections.

@terrykong terrykong merged commit 37265c3 into main Jan 29, 2024
111 of 112 checks passed
@terrykong terrykong deleted the log-fix branch January 29, 2024 19:15
terrykong added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 31, 2024
…of metrics (#503)

Follow up of #496 

## changes:
1. upstream MGMN metrics for pax and t5x were being combined so that if
t5x finishes first, then paxml will print both t5x and paxml metrics.
This is fixed by changing the artifact prefix so that t5x only prints
t5x metrics and pax only prints pax metrics.
2. Updates the metric printing to the same as #496 to show everything in
a markdown table instead of a bunch of json files which was difficult to
visually inspect
ashors1 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 3, 2024
This PR fixes some issues in reporting that were introduced in #440 . In
particular, with the introduction of a non-empty ARTIFACT_NAME in the
rosetta tests, the tables no longer were [presented
correctly](https://github.com/NVIDIA/JAX-Toolbox/actions/runs/7638798396/attempts/1#summary-20820699653):

![image](https://github.com/NVIDIA/JAX-Toolbox/assets/7576060/7419ac14-e3a6-452e-a787-91da6087f7ee)

I couldn't find anywhere that used the non-default value of
ARTIFACT_NAME, so I removed it in the `_test_*_rosetta.yaml` files.

This change also cleans up some dead code (EXTRA_TEST_ARGS,
EXTRA_GIN_ARGS) since they didn't appear to be used anywhere.

Also the table for rosetta-pax metrics were quite long so I rewrote that
to output as a markdown table.
ashors1 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 3, 2024
…of metrics (#503)

Follow up of #496 

## changes:
1. upstream MGMN metrics for pax and t5x were being combined so that if
t5x finishes first, then paxml will print both t5x and paxml metrics.
This is fixed by changing the artifact prefix so that t5x only prints
t5x metrics and pax only prints pax metrics.
2. Updates the metric printing to the same as #496 to show everything in
a markdown table instead of a bunch of json files which was difficult to
visually inspect
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.

3 participants