I just tried using TPU in Google Colab and I want to see how much TPU is faster than GPU. I got surprisingly the opposite result.
The following is the NN.
random_image = tf.random_normal((100, 100, 100, 3))
result = tf.layers.conv2d(random_image, 32, 7)
result = tf.reduce_sum(result)
Performance results:
CPU: 8s
GPU: 0.18s
TPU: 0.50s
I wonder why.... The complete code for TPU is as follows:
def calc():
random_image = tf.random_normal((100, 100, 100, 3))
result = tf.layers.conv2d(random_image, 32, 7)
result = tf.reduce_sum(result)
return result
tpu_ops = tf.contrib.tpu.batch_parallel(calc, [], num_shards=8)
session = tf.Session(tpu_address)
try:
print('Initializing global variables...')
session.run(tf.global_variables_initializer())
print('Warming up...')
session.run(tf.contrib.tpu.initialize_system())
print('Profiling')
start = time.time()
session.run(tpu_ops)
end = time.time()
elapsed = end - start
print(elapsed)
finally:
session.run(tf.contrib.tpu.shutdown_system())
session.close()
Benchmarking devices properly is hard, so please take everything you learn from these examples with a grain of salt. It's better in general to compare specific models you are interested in (e.g. running an ImageNet network) to understand performance differences. That said, I understand it's fun to do this, so...
Larger models will illustrate the TPU and GPU performance better. Your example also is including the compilation time in the cost of the TPU call: every call after the first for a given program and shape will be cached, so you will want to tpu_ops once before starting the timer unless you want to capture the compilation time.
Currently each call to a TPU function copies the weights to the TPU before it can start running, this affects small operations more significantly. Here's an example that runs a loop on the TPU before returning to the CPU, with the following outputs.
1 0.010800600051879883
10 0.09931182861328125
100 0.5581905841827393
500 2.7688047885894775
. So you can actually run 100 iterations of this function in 0.55s.
import os
import time
import tensorflow as tf
def calc(n):
img = tf.random_normal((128, 100, 100, 3))
def body(_):
result = tf.layers.conv2d(img, 32, 7)
result = tf.reduce_sum(result)
return result
return tf.contrib.tpu.repeat(n[0], body, [0.0])
session = tf.Session('grpc://' + os.environ['COLAB_TPU_ADDR'])
try:
print('Initializing TPU...')
session.run(tf.contrib.tpu.initialize_system())
for i in [1, 10, 100, 500]:
tpu_ops = tf.contrib.tpu.batch_parallel(calc, [[i] * 8], num_shards=8)
print('Warming up...')
session.run(tf.global_variables_initializer())
session.run(tpu_ops)
print('Profiling')
start = time.time()
session.run(tpu_ops)
end = time.time()
elapsed = end - start
print(i, elapsed)
finally:
session.run(tf.contrib.tpu.shutdown_system())
session.close()
Related
I use pool.map from multiprocessing to parallelize my python code. When I call my tensorflow/keras model with pool.map, the code hangs if my neural network is larger than a certain size. I still have plenty of RAM available, and calling the model outside of pool works fine.
I use python 3.7, tensorflow 2.3 on linux.
A mwe is provided below, it is also on colab:
def my_function(i):
a = MODEL(np.array(i).reshape(1,1))
print('foo', i)
return a
THREADS = os.cpu_count()
N = 4
NEURONS = 150000 # works for 100000, hangs for 150000
MODEL = tf.keras.Sequential([tf.keras.layers.Dense(NEURONS, input_shape=(1,))])
my_function(10) # works fine
pool = multiprocessing.Pool(THREADS)
_ = pool.map(my_function, range(N)) # hangs
pool.close()
pool.join()
Any idea what the issue is? How can I call a large model in parallel?
Edit: the size of a is not the issue, and the code hangs only if tf.keras is called once outside of pool, see mwe below and colab. The critical number of neurons is lower than in the original example. Any idea?
def my_function(i):
print('start', i)
model = tf.keras.Sequential([tf.keras.layers.Dense(NEURONS, input_shape=(1,))])
print('finish', i)
return None
THREADS = os.cpu_count()
N = 4
NEURONS = 20000 # works with 10000, not with 20000
# works
pool = multiprocessing.Pool(THREADS)
_ = pool.map(my_function, range(N))
pool.close()
pool.join()
# works
my_function(10)
# doesn't work if many neurons
pool = multiprocessing.Pool(THREADS)
_ = pool.map(my_function, range(N))
pool.close()
pool.join()
I ran my code for an emotion detection model using Tensorflow Federated simulation. My code work perfectly fine using CPUs only. However, I received this error when trying to run TFF with GPU.
ValueError: Detected dataset reduce op in multi-GPU TFF simulation: `use_experimental_simulation_loop=True` for `tff.learning`; or use `for ... in iter(dataset)` for your own dataset iteration.Reduce op will be functional after b/159180073.
What is this error about and how can I fix it? I tried to search many places but found no answer.
Here is the call stack if it help. It is very long so I pasted into this link: https://pastebin.com/b1R93gf1
EDIT:
Here is the code containing iterative_process
def startTraining(output_file):
iterative_process = tff.learning.build_federated_averaging_process(
model_fn,
client_optimizer_fn=lambda: tf.keras.optimizers.SGD(learning_rate=0.01),
server_optimizer_fn=lambda: tf.keras.optimizers.SGD(learning_rate=1.0),
use_experimental_simulation_loop=True
)
flstate = iterative_process.initialize()
evaluation = tff.learning.build_federated_evaluation(model_fn)
output_file.write(
'round,available_users,loss,sparse_categorical_accuracy,val_loss,val_sparse_categorical_accuracy,test_loss,test_sparse_categorical_accuracy\n')
curr_round_result = [0,0,100,0,100,0]
min_val_loss = 100
for round in range(1,ROUND_COUNT + 1):
available_users = fetch_available_users_and_increase_time(ROUND_DURATION_AVERAGE + random.randint(-ROUND_DURATION_VARIATION, ROUND_DURATION_VARIATION + 1))
if(len(available_users) == 0):
write_to_file(curr_round_result)
continue
train_data = make_federated_data(available_users, 'train')
flstate, metrics = iterative_process.next(flstate, train_data)
val_data = make_federated_data(available_users, 'val')
val_metrics = evaluation(flstate.model, val_data)
curr_round_result[0] = round
curr_round_result[1] = len(available_users)
curr_round_result[2] = metrics['train']['loss']
curr_round_result[3] = metrics['train']['sparse_categorical_accuracy']
curr_round_result[4] = val_metrics['loss']
curr_round_result[5] = val_metrics['sparse_categorical_accuracy']
write_to_file(curr_round_result)
Here is the code for make_federated_data
def make_federated_data(users, dataset_type):
offset = 0
if(dataset_type == 'val'):
offset = train_size
elif(dataset_type == 'test'):
offset = train_size + val_size
global LOADED_USER
for id in users:
if(id + offset not in LOADED_USER):
LOADED_USER[id + offset] = getDatasetFromFilePath(filepaths[id + offset])
return [
LOADED_USER[id + offset]
for id in users
]
TFF does support Multi-GPU, and as the error message says one of two things is happening:
The code is using tff.learning but using the default use_experimental_simulation_loop argument value of False. With multiple GPUs, this must be set to True when using APIs including tff.learning.build_federated_averaging_process. For example, calling with:
training_process = tff.learning.build_federated_averaging_process(
..., use_experimental_simulation_loop=True)
The code contains a custom tf.data.Dataset.reduce(...) call somewhere. This must be replaced with Python code that iterates over the dataset. For example:
result = dataset.reduce(initial_state=0, reduce_func=lambda s, x: s + x)
becomes
s = 0
for x in iter(dataset):
s += x
I realized that TFF has not yet supported multi-GPUs. Therefore, we need to limit number visible of GPUs to just 1, using:
os.environ["CUDA_VISIBLE_DEVICES"] = "0"
My script is failing due to too high memory usage. When I reduce the batch size it works.
#tf.function(autograph=not DEBUG)
def step(prev_state, input_b):
input_b = tf.reshape(input_b, shape=[1,input_b.shape[0]])
state = FastALIFStateTuple(v=prev_state[0], z=prev_state[1], b=prev_state[2], r=prev_state[3])
new_b = self.decay_b * state.b + (tf.ones(shape=[self.units],dtype=tf.float32) - self.decay_b) * state.z
thr = self.thr + new_b * self.beta
z = state.z
i_in = tf.matmul(input_b, W_in)
i_rec = tf.matmul(z, W_rec)
i_t = i_in + i_rec
I_reset = z * thr * self.dt
new_v = self._decay * state.v + (1 - self._decay) * i_t - I_reset
# Spike generation
is_refractory = tf.greater(state.r, .1)
zeros_like_spikes = tf.zeros_like(z)
new_z = tf.where(is_refractory, zeros_like_spikes, self.compute_z(new_v, thr))
new_r = tf.clip_by_value(state.r + self.n_refractory * new_z - 1,
0., float(self.n_refractory))
return [new_v, new_z, new_b, new_r]
#tf.function(autograph=not DEBUG)
def evolve_single(inputs):
accumulated_state = tf.scan(step, inputs, initializer=state0)
Z = tf.squeeze(accumulated_state[1]) # -> [T,units]
if self.model_settings['avg_spikes']:
Z = tf.reshape(tf.reduce_mean(Z, axis=0), shape=(1,-1))
out = tf.matmul(Z, W_out) + b_out
return out # - [BS,Num_labels]
# # - Using a simple loop
# out_store = []
# for i in range(fingerprint_3d.shape[0]):
# out_store.append(tf.squeeze(evolve_single(fingerprint_3d[i,:,:])))
# return tf.reshape(out_store, shape=[fingerprint_3d.shape[0],self.d_out])
final_out = tf.squeeze(tf.map_fn(evolve_single, fingerprint_3d)) # -> [BS,T,self.units]
return final_out
This code snippet is inside a tf.function, but I omitted it since I don't think it's relevant.
As can be seen, I run the code on fingerprint_3d, a tensor that has the dimension [BatchSize,Time,InputDimension], e.g. [50,100,20]. When I run this with BatchSize < 10 everything works fine, although tf.scan already uses a lot of memory for that.
When I now execute the code on a batch of size 50, suddenly I get an OOM, even though I am executing it in an iterative matter (here commented out).
How should I execute this code so that the Batch Size doesn't matter?
Is tensorflow maybe parallelizing my for loop so that it executed over multiple batches at once?
Another unrelated question is the following: What function instead of tf.scan should I use if I only want to accumulate one state variable, compared to the case for tf.scan where it just accumulates all the state variables? Or is that possible with tf.scan?
As mentioned in the discussions here, tf.foldl, tf.foldr, and tf.scan all require keeping track of all values for all iterations, which is necessary for computations like gradients. I am not aware of any ways to mitigate this issue; still, I would also be interested if anyone has a better answer than mine.
When I used
#tf.function
def get_loss_and_gradients():
with tf.GradientTape(persistent=False) as tape:
logits, spikes = rnn.call(fingerprint_input=graz_dict["train_input"], W_in=W_in, W_rec=W_rec, W_out=W_out, b_out=b_out)
loss = loss_normal(tf.cast(graz_dict["train_groundtruth"],dtype=tf.int32), logits)
gradients = tape.gradient(loss, [W_in,W_rec,W_out,b_out])
return loss, logits, spikes, gradients
it works.
When I remove the #tf.function decorator the memory blows up. So it really seems important that tensorflow can create a graph for you computations.
Work environment
TensorFlow release version : 1.3.0-rc2
TensorFlow git version : v1.3.0-rc1-994-gb93fd37
Operating System : CentOS Linux release 7.2.1511 (Core)
Problem Scenario
I am using TensorFlow StagingArea ops for increasing the efficiency of my input pipeline. Here is a part of my code snippet which constructs the input pipeline :
train_put_op_list = []
train_get_op_list = []
val_put_op_list = []
val_get_op_list = []
with tf.variable_scope(tf.get_variable_scope()) as vscope:
for i in range(4):
with tf.device('/gpu:%d'%i):
with tf.name_scope('GPU-Tower-%d'%i) as scope:
trainstagingarea = tf.contrib.staging.StagingArea(dtypes=[tf.float32, tf.int32],
shapes=[[64, 221, 221, 3],[64]],
capacity=0)
valstagingarea = tf.contrib.staging.StagingArea(dtypes=[tf.float32, tf.int32],
shapes=[[128, 221, 221, 3],[128]],
capacity=0)
train_put_op_list.append(trainstagingarea.put(train_iterator.get_next()))
val_put_op_list.append(valstagingarea.put(val_iterator.get_next()))
train_get_op_list.append(trainstagingarea.get())
val_get_op_list.append(valstagingarea.get())
with tf.device('/cpu:0'):
worktype = tf.get_variable("wt",[], initializer=tf.zeros_initializer(), trainable=False)
workcondition = tf.equal(worktype, 1)
#elem = tf.cond(workcondition, lambda: train_iterator.get_next(), lambda: val_iterator.get_next())
elem = tf.cond(workcondition, lambda: train_get_op_list[i], lambda: val_get_op_list[i])
# This is followed by the network construction and optimizer
Now at the time of execution, I first run the put() ops a couple of times and then go on to run the iterations. It is shown below :
with tf.Session(config=config) as sess:
sess.run(init_op)
sess.run(iterator_training_op)
sess.run(iterator_validation_op)
sess.run(tf.assign(worktype, 0))
for i in range(4):
sess.run(train_put_op_list)
sess.run(val_put_op_list)
writer = tf.summary.FileWriter('.', graph=tf.get_default_graph())
epoch = 0
iter = 0
previous = 0
while(epoch<10):
try:
if(PROCESSINGTYPE is 'validation'):
sess.run(val_put_op_list)
[val_accu, summaries, numsamp] = sess.run([running_accuracy, validation_summary_op, processed])
previous+=numsamp
print("Running Accuracy = {} : Number of sample processed = {} ".format(val_accu, previous))
else:
sess.run(train_put_op_list)
[loss_value, _, train_accu, summaries, batch_accu, numsamp] = sess.run([total_loss, apply_gradient_op, running_accuracy, training_summary_op, batch_accuracy, pr\
ocessed])
#Remaining part of the code (not important for question)
Problem Description
The use of StagingArea improves the speed substantially (almost 3-4 times).
However, the code hangs due to some block. I am not sure if the block comes from get() or put() operations. Here is the actual output :
# Validation is done first and the following is the output
Running Accuracy = 0.0 : Number of sample processed = 512
Running Accuracy = 0.00390625 : Number of sample processed = 1024
Running Accuracy = 0.0 : Number of sample processed = 1536
Running Accuracy = 0.001953125 : Number of sample processed = 2048
# The code hangs here
You can notice that in the beginning of tf.Session() as sess:, the get() and put() ops were run for 4 times. The output is limited to 4 lines as well. This means that,
sess.run(val_put_op_list) within the while loop does not do anything. So, when the get() is called by sess.run(running_accuracy)..., the StagingArea is found empty after 4 lines and hence a blocking happens.
Am I correct in my analysis of the problem ?
What is the correct way to use the get() and put() ops here ?
If StagingArea is full and put() is blocked, would that also block the whole code ? TensorFlow documentation does not say anything about it.
Take a look at https://github.com/tensorflow/tensorflow/pull/13684. This resolves some deadlocks and will likely go into 1.4.0. Disclaimer: am not a tensorflower.
I found a peculiar property of lstm cell(not limited to lstm but I only examined with this) of tensorflow which has not been reported as far as I know.
I don't know whether it actually has, so I left this post in SO. Below is a toy code for this problem:
import tensorflow as tf
import numpy as np
import time
def network(input_list):
input,init_hidden_c,init_hidden_m = input_list
cell = tf.nn.rnn_cell.BasicLSTMCell(256, state_is_tuple=True)
init_hidden = tf.nn.rnn_cell.LSTMStateTuple(init_hidden_c, init_hidden_m)
states, hidden_cm = tf.nn.dynamic_rnn(cell, input, dtype=tf.float32, initial_state=init_hidden)
net = [v for v in tf.trainable_variables()]
return states, hidden_cm, net
def action(x, h_c, h_m):
t0 = time.time()
outputs, output_h = sess.run([rnn_states[:,-1:,:], rnn_hidden_cm], feed_dict={
rnn_input:x,
rnn_init_hidden_c: h_c,
rnn_init_hidden_m: h_m
})
dt = time.time() - t0
return outputs, output_h, dt
rnn_input = tf.placeholder("float", [None, None, 512])
rnn_init_hidden_c = tf.placeholder("float", [None,256])
rnn_init_hidden_m = tf.placeholder("float", [None,256])
rnn_input_list = [rnn_input, rnn_init_hidden_c, rnn_init_hidden_m]
rnn_states, rnn_hidden_cm, rnn_net = network(rnn_input_list)
feed_input = np.random.uniform(low=-1.,high=1.,size=(1,1,512))
feed_init_hidden_c = np.zeros(shape=(1,256))
feed_init_hidden_m = np.zeros(shape=(1,256))
sess = tf.Session()
sess.run(tf.global_variables_initializer())
for i in range(10000):
_, output_hidden_cm, deltat = action(feed_input, feed_init_hidden_c, feed_init_hidden_m)
if i % 10 == 0:
print 'Running time: ' + str(deltat)
(feed_init_hidden_c, feed_init_hidden_m) = output_hidden_cm
feed_input = np.random.uniform(low=-1.,high=1.,size=(1,1,512))
[Not important]What this code does is to generate an output from 'network()' function containing LSTM where the input's temporal dimension is 1, so output's is also 1, and pull in&out initial state for each step of running.
[Important] Looking the 'sess.run()' part. For some reasons in my real code, I happened to put [:,-1:,:] for 'rnn_states'. What is happening is then the time spent for each 'sess.run()' increases. For some inspection by my own, I found this slow down stems from that [:,-1:,:]. I just wanted to get the output at the last time step. If you do 'outputs, output_h = sess.run([rnn_states, rnn_hidden_cm], feed_dict{~' w/o [:,-1:,:] and take 'last_output = outputs[:,-1:,:]' after the 'sess.run()', then the slow down does not occur.
I do not know why this exponential increment of time happens with that [:,-1:,:] running. Is this the nature of tensorflow hasn't been documented but particularly slows down(may be adding more graph by its own?)?
Thank you, and hope this mistake not happen for other users by this post.
I encountered the same problem, with TensorFlow slowing down for each iteration I ran it, and found this question while trying to debug it. Here's a short description of my situation and how I solved it for future reference. Hopefully it can point someone in the right direction and save them some time.
In my case the problem was mainly that I didn't make use of feed_dict to supply the network state when executing sess.run(). Instead I redeclared outputs, final_state and prediction every iteration. The answer at https://github.com/tensorflow/tensorflow/issues/1439#issuecomment-194405649 made me realize how stupid that was... I was constantly creating new graph nodes in every iteration, making it all slower and slower. The problematic code looked something like this:
# defining the network
lstm_layer = rnn.BasicLSTMCell(num_units, forget_bias=1)
outputs, final_state = rnn.static_rnn(lstm_layer, input, initial_state=rnn_state, dtype='float32')
prediction = tf.nn.softmax(tf.matmul(outputs[-1], out_weights)+out_bias)
for input_data in data_seq:
# redeclaring, stupid stupid...
outputs, final_state = rnn.static_rnn(lstm_layer, input, initial_state=rnn_state, dtype='float32')
prediction = tf.nn.softmax(tf.matmul(outputs[-1], out_weights)+out_bias)
p, rnn_state = sess.run((prediction, final_state), feed_dict={x: input_data})
The solution was of course to only declare the nodes once in the beginning, and supply the new data with feed_dict. The code went from being half slow (> 15 ms in the beginning) and becoming slower for every iteration, to execute every iteration in around 1 ms. My new code looks something like this:
out_weights = tf.Variable(tf.random_normal([num_units, n_classes]), name="out_weights")
out_bias = tf.Variable(tf.random_normal([n_classes]), name="out_bias")
# placeholder for the network state
state_placeholder = tf.placeholder(tf.float32, [2, 1, num_units])
rnn_state = tf.nn.rnn_cell.LSTMStateTuple(state_placeholder[0], state_placeholder[1])
x = tf.placeholder('float', [None, 1, n_input])
input = tf.unstack(x, 1, 1)
# defining the network
lstm_layer = rnn.BasicLSTMCell(num_units, forget_bias=1)
outputs, final_state = rnn.static_rnn(lstm_layer, input, initial_state=rnn_state, dtype='float32')
prediction = tf.nn.softmax(tf.matmul(outputs[-1], out_weights)+out_bias)
# actual network state, which we input with feed_dict
_rnn_state = tf.nn.rnn_cell.LSTMStateTuple(np.zeros((1, num_units), dtype='float32'), np.zeros((1, num_units), dtype='float32'))
it = 0
for input_data in data_seq:
encl_input = [[input_data]]
p, _rnn_state = sess.run((prediction, final_state), feed_dict={x: encl_input, rnn_state: _rnn_state})
print("{} - {}".format(it, p))
it += 1
Moving the declaration out from the for loop also got rid of the problem which the OP sdr2002 had, doing a slice outputs[-1] in sess.run() inside the for loop.
As mentioned above, no sliced output for 'sess.run()' is much appreciated for this case.
def action(x, h_c, h_m):
t0 = time.time()
outputs, output_h = sess.run([rnn_states, rnn_hidden_cm], feed_dict={
rnn_input:x,
rnn_init_hidden_c: h_c,
rnn_init_hidden_m: h_m
})
outputs = outputs[:,-1:,:]
dt = time.time() - t0
return outputs, output_h, dt