Add Flash Attention 2 support to Bark #27364
Conversation
|
The documentation is not available anymore as the PR was closed or merged. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Very clean - thanks @ylacombe for adding this! Keen to see what kind of performance gain we get from this
| cls, config, torch_dtype: Optional[torch.dtype] = None, device_map: Optional[Union[str, Dict[str, int]]] = None | ||
| ): | ||
| """ | ||
| If you don't know about Flash Attention, check out the official repository of flash attention: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could be worth explaining quickly why we override this method in the docstring!
|
|
||
| dummy_attention_mask = inputs_dict.get("attention_mask", None) | ||
|
|
||
| if dummy_attention_mask is not None: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What's the motivation behind overriding the attention mask here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Making sure that at least one of the input ids is masked !
|
|
||
| logits = ( | ||
| outputs.hidden_states[-1] | ||
| if not model.config.is_encoder_decoder |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We know bark is not encoder-decoder -> could we simplify the tests to reflect this?
| else outputs_fa.decoder_hidden_states[-1] | ||
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| assert torch.allclose(logits_fa, logits, atol=4e-2, rtol=4e-2) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pretty high tolerance! We've compared the audio outputs qualitatively with / without flash attention and they match?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the quick review, I've actually copied out and modified a test that is in the general suite, so I haven't change anything -> tolerance and attention mask overriding are the same than the original test!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I had the same comment on tolerance for FA2 tests :D 0.04 was agreed as being acceptable
Co-authored-by: Sanchit Gandhi <[email protected]>
…ers into bark-flashattention-2
|
Thanks for the quick review, I've addressed your comments 🤗 |
| else outputs_fa.decoder_hidden_states[-1] | ||
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| assert torch.allclose(logits_fa, logits, atol=4e-2, rtol=4e-2) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I had the same comment on tolerance for FA2 tests :D 0.04 was agreed as being acceptable
Co-authored-by: amyeroberts <[email protected]>
|
Merging ! thanks for the quick reviews! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for adding this! I usually also request to add a section in the readme, and update the flash attention list of models that are supported here and the readme like this change.
| else: | ||
| present = None | ||
|
|
||
| attn_output = self._flash_attention_forward(query, key, value, attention_mask, query_len, dropout=self.dropout) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Here self.dropout is a module not a float. The doc of the _flash_attention_forward does not match and is not restrictive enough
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It might work but I'd rather we standardize!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
* change handmade attention mask to _prepare_4d_attention_mask * add flashattention2 support in Bark * add flashattention2 tests on BarkSemanticModel * make style * fix flashattention and tests + make style * fix memory leak and allow Bark to pass flash attention to sub-models * make style * Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Sanchit Gandhi <[email protected]> * remove unecessary code from tests + justify overriding * Update tests/models/bark/test_modeling_bark.py Co-authored-by: amyeroberts <[email protected]> * make style --------- Co-authored-by: Sanchit Gandhi <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: amyeroberts <[email protected]>
What does this PR do?
Following a recent series of PRs and issues to improve Bark, this PR aims to add FA2 support to Bark. Bark self-attention class supports both causal and non-causal attention but otherwise changes are minimal.
I've also taken the opportunity to switch to
_prepare_4d_attention_maskinstead of manually creating the 4d attention mask.Benchmarks are currently running at the moment to measure speed/memory gains!
cc @sanchit-gandhi and @amyeroberts