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

Add test for deepseek_vl #1136

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

Conversation

meenakshiramanathan1
Copy link
Contributor

@meenakshiramanathan1 meenakshiramanathan1 commented Jan 30, 2025

Model doesn't have huggingface direct version, hence model implementation is from corresponding github repository.
Model requires timm version>=0.9.16 which was conflicting with segmentation_models_pytorch package so both versions have been upgraded to resolve conflicts.
The custom generate function generates text by iteratively predicting tokens while maintaining a fixed sequence length using padding.
The model input shape is kept static by preallocating padded_inputs_embeds, which is updated each step
with new token embeddings corresponding to next_token_id until the sequence is complete.

Model is currently failing in verify with pcc drop of 0.96.

Copy link

TestsPassedSkippedFailed ❌️
TT-Forge-FE Tests1 ran0 passed0 skipped1 failed
TestResult
TT-Forge-FE Tests
pytest
test_deepseek.forge.test.models.pytorch.multimodal.deepseek.test_deepseek❌ failure

Copy link
Contributor

@nvukobratTT nvukobratTT left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Don't we have HuggingFace versions for which we don't need to copy model implementations?

Copy link

TestsPassedSkippedFailed ❌️
TT-Forge-FE Tests1 ran0 passed0 skipped1 failed
TestResult
TT-Forge-FE Tests
pytest
test_deepseek.forge.test.models.pytorch.multimodal.deepseek.test_deepseek❌ failure

Copy link

TestsPassedSkippedFailed ❌️
TT-Forge-FE Tests1 ran0 passed0 skipped1 failed
TestResult
TT-Forge-FE Tests
pytest
test_deepseek.forge.test.models.pytorch.multimodal.deepseek.test_deepseek❌ failure

1 similar comment
Copy link

TestsPassedSkippedFailed ❌️
TT-Forge-FE Tests1 ran0 passed0 skipped1 failed
TestResult
TT-Forge-FE Tests
pytest
test_deepseek.forge.test.models.pytorch.multimodal.deepseek.test_deepseek❌ failure

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Feb 4, 2025

TestsPassedSkippedFailed ❌️
TT-Forge-FE Tests1 ran0 passed0 skipped1 failed
TestResult
TT-Forge-FE Tests
pytest
test_deepseek.forge.test.models.pytorch.multimodal.deepseek.test_deepseek❌ failure

3 similar comments
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Feb 4, 2025

TestsPassedSkippedFailed ❌️
TT-Forge-FE Tests1 ran0 passed0 skipped1 failed
TestResult
TT-Forge-FE Tests
pytest
test_deepseek.forge.test.models.pytorch.multimodal.deepseek.test_deepseek❌ failure

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Feb 4, 2025

TestsPassedSkippedFailed ❌️
TT-Forge-FE Tests1 ran0 passed0 skipped1 failed
TestResult
TT-Forge-FE Tests
pytest
test_deepseek.forge.test.models.pytorch.multimodal.deepseek.test_deepseek❌ failure

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Feb 4, 2025

TestsPassedSkippedFailed ❌️
TT-Forge-FE Tests1 ran0 passed0 skipped1 failed
TestResult
TT-Forge-FE Tests
pytest
test_deepseek.forge.test.models.pytorch.multimodal.deepseek.test_deepseek❌ failure

@meenakshiramanathan1 meenakshiramanathan1 force-pushed the mramanathan/deepseek branch 4 times, most recently from eccc9ef to 9baabd6 Compare February 5, 2025 08:52
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Feb 5, 2025

TestsPassedSkippedFailed ❌️
TT-Forge-FE Tests1 ran0 passed0 skipped1 failed
TestResult
TT-Forge-FE Tests
pytest
test_deepseek_vl.forge.test.models.pytorch.multimodal.deepseek.test_deepseek_vl❌ failure

1 similar comment
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Feb 5, 2025

TestsPassedSkippedFailed ❌️
TT-Forge-FE Tests1 ran0 passed0 skipped1 failed
TestResult
TT-Forge-FE Tests
pytest
test_deepseek_vl.forge.test.models.pytorch.multimodal.deepseek.test_deepseek_vl❌ failure

@meenakshiramanathan1 meenakshiramanathan1 force-pushed the mramanathan/deepseek branch 3 times, most recently from a9a7143 to 563b03e Compare February 6, 2025 15:29
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Feb 6, 2025

TestsPassedSkippedFailed ❌️
TT-Forge-FE Tests1 ran0 passed0 skipped1 failed
TestResult
TT-Forge-FE Tests
pytest
test_deepseek_vl.forge.test.models.pytorch.multimodal.deepseek.test_deepseek_vl❌ failure

2 similar comments
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Feb 6, 2025

TestsPassedSkippedFailed ❌️
TT-Forge-FE Tests1 ran0 passed0 skipped1 failed
TestResult
TT-Forge-FE Tests
pytest
test_deepseek_vl.forge.test.models.pytorch.multimodal.deepseek.test_deepseek_vl❌ failure

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Feb 6, 2025

TestsPassedSkippedFailed ❌️
TT-Forge-FE Tests1 ran0 passed0 skipped1 failed
TestResult
TT-Forge-FE Tests
pytest
test_deepseek_vl.forge.test.models.pytorch.multimodal.deepseek.test_deepseek_vl❌ failure

Copy link

TestsPassed ✅Skipped ⚠️Failed
TT-Forge-FE Tests660 ran518 passed142 skipped0 failed
TestResult
No test annotations available

@meenakshiramanathan1 meenakshiramanathan1 force-pushed the mramanathan/deepseek branch 3 times, most recently from adfe853 to 273ee1b Compare February 17, 2025 07:56
return framework_model, vl_gpt, tokenizer, inputs_embeds


def generation(max_new_tokens, model, inputs_embeds, tokenizer, vl_gpt):
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Great work @meenakshiramanathan1 . Can we reuse this script for other generation models like t5, llama, and more? BTW, we can expect a conflict related to vl_gpt used here.

cc: @nvukobratTT May I know your thoughts in this?

@meenakshiramanathan1
Copy link
Contributor Author

Don't we have HuggingFace versions for which we don't need to copy model implementations?

Model doesn't have huggingface direct version, hence model implementation is from corresponding github repository.

@meenakshiramanathan1 meenakshiramanathan1 force-pushed the mramanathan/deepseek branch 2 times, most recently from b3431b2 to 20c7194 Compare February 17, 2025 14:02
@meenakshiramanathan1 meenakshiramanathan1 marked this pull request as ready for review February 17, 2025 14:09
@meenakshiramanathan1 meenakshiramanathan1 requested review from nvukobratTT and removed request for pilkicTT and dgolubovicTT February 17, 2025 14:09
Copy link

TestsPassedSkippedFailed ❌️
TT-Forge-FE Tests1 ran0 passed0 skipped1 failed
TestResult
TT-Forge-FE Tests
pytest
test_deepseek_math_prefill.forge.test.models.pytorch.multimodal.deepseek_math.test_deepseek_math_prefill❌ failure

3 similar comments
Copy link

TestsPassedSkippedFailed ❌️
TT-Forge-FE Tests1 ran0 passed0 skipped1 failed
TestResult
TT-Forge-FE Tests
pytest
test_deepseek_math_prefill.forge.test.models.pytorch.multimodal.deepseek_math.test_deepseek_math_prefill❌ failure

Copy link

TestsPassedSkippedFailed ❌️
TT-Forge-FE Tests1 ran0 passed0 skipped1 failed
TestResult
TT-Forge-FE Tests
pytest
test_deepseek_math_prefill.forge.test.models.pytorch.multimodal.deepseek_math.test_deepseek_math_prefill❌ failure

Copy link

TestsPassedSkippedFailed ❌️
TT-Forge-FE Tests1 ran0 passed0 skipped1 failed
TestResult
TT-Forge-FE Tests
pytest
test_deepseek_math_prefill.forge.test.models.pytorch.multimodal.deepseek_math.test_deepseek_math_prefill❌ failure

…ps config (#1231)

The [generate model ops test
pipeline](https://github.com/tenstorrent/tt-forge-fe/actions/runs/13328380954/job/37226649520)
is currently freezing during the unique ops configuration extraction
phase

Error:
`Failed on "DecomposeEinsum" TVM callback`

This error is encountered in the test case:

`forge/test/models/pytorch/vision/detr/test_detr.py::test_detr_segmentation[facebook/detr-resnet-50-panoptic]`
test cases.

To prevent the extraction process from hanging indefinitely, a timeout
of 1200 seconds (20 minutes) has been added. This ensures that if the
unique ops configuration extraction takes too long, the test will be
terminated.
Copy link

TestsPassed ✅Skipped ⚠️Failed
TT-Forge-FE Tests601 ran480 passed121 skipped0 failed
TestResult
No test annotations available

Copy link

TestsPassed ✅Skipped ⚠️Failed
TT-Forge-FE Tests660 ran520 passed140 skipped0 failed
TestResult
No test annotations available

1 similar comment
Copy link

TestsPassed ✅Skipped ⚠️Failed
TT-Forge-FE Tests660 ran520 passed140 skipped0 failed
TestResult
No test annotations available

Copy link

TestsPassed ✅Skipped ⚠️Failed
TT-Forge-FE Tests601 ran480 passed121 skipped0 failed
TestResult
No test annotations available

Copy link
Contributor

@nvukobratTT nvukobratTT left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

As this is a lot of new code that is mostly copied from GitHub, let me see can we get new repository for this purpose, and then link it to ours.

E.g. have a repo that will contain all third-party GitHub repositories as submodules, from which we can load this and similar models to run compile against them. That way, in FFE we'll only store model tests + wrappers if some modification is needed.

What do you think @meenakshiramanathan1 ?

@meenakshiramanathan1
Copy link
Contributor Author

As this is a lot of new code that is mostly copied from GitHub, let me see can we get new repository for this purpose, and then link it to ours.

E.g. have a repo that will contain all third-party GitHub repositories as submodules, from which we can load this and similar models to run compile against them. That way, in FFE we'll only store model tests + wrappers if some modification is needed.

What do you think @meenakshiramanathan1 ?

Sure @nvukobratTT , I will keep this in draft for now.

@meenakshiramanathan1 meenakshiramanathan1 marked this pull request as draft February 25, 2025 04:24
@ashokkumarkannan1
Copy link
Contributor

As this is a lot of new code that is mostly copied from GitHub, let me see can we get new repository for this purpose, and then link it to ours.

E.g. have a repo that will contain all third-party GitHub repositories as submodules, from which we can load this and similar models to run compile against them. That way, in FFE we'll only store model tests + wrappers if some modification is needed.

What do you think @meenakshiramanathan1 ?

That sound good @nvukobratTT . We can do that. As we are going to focus on P1 models and models supported in tt-torch which is not yet supported in tt-forge-fe. What will be the priority of moving all the GitHub copied code to a new repo? Because there are some other models also fall in this case as you know. Could you please clarify this?

@nvukobratTT
Copy link
Contributor

As this is a lot of new code that is mostly copied from GitHub, let me see can we get new repository for this purpose, and then link it to ours.
E.g. have a repo that will contain all third-party GitHub repositories as submodules, from which we can load this and similar models to run compile against them. That way, in FFE we'll only store model tests + wrappers if some modification is needed.
What do you think @meenakshiramanathan1 ?

That sound good @nvukobratTT . We can do that. As we are going to focus on P1 models and models supported in tt-torch which is not yet supported in tt-forge-fe. What will be the priority of moving all the GitHub copied code to a new repo? Because there are some other models also fall in this case as you know. Could you please clarify this?

Synced offline

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.

4 participants