Idea for Discussion: Device Memory Management Primitives
Nessuno ha ancora preso questa issue.
Valutazione
- Difficoltà
- 5/5
- Tempo stimato
- Più di una settimana
- Idoneità per principianti
- 8/100
- Tipo di issue
- Funzionalità
- Chiarezza
- Abbastanza chiara
- Stato di attività
- Ferma
- Stack tecnologico
- javascript
- Ambito
- api, machine-learning
Direzione di ricerca
This is an open design discussion about memory primitives for MLGraph and MLBuffer in the WebNN spec, not a bounded change. Start from the spec's MLGraph and MLBuffer/MLTensor sections and the related caching discussion the issue links to. Done would mean a recorded design decision from the maintainers, not a code patch, so a newcomer should first raise the question on the thread.
Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.
Descrizione
The idea is perhaps future-looking, but I'd like to bring it up for discussion.
Motivations
- Reduce the GPU/NPU memory required for completing a use case (e.g. text2image).
- Reduce the memory copy overhead of loading model weights (e.g. on disk) into GPU/NPU
- Enable processing of models whose weights can't fit in main memory as a whole (e.g. pipelining)
Real World Examples
Case 1: Text to Image
Text to Image use cases generally involves multiple models, represented as a three stage pipeline (consisting of at least 3 models).
Take FLUX to generate an image of 1024x1024 for example:
| Stage | Model(s) Example | Model Weight Size | Model's Resident Memory on GPU (Approx.) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Text to Embedding | Google T5 XXL and CLIP-L; fp8 | 7GB | 8-12GB |
| 2. Diffusion / Denoising | FLUX UNet; fp8 | 12GB | 16GB |
| 3. Image decoding | FLUX Variational AutoEncoder; fp8 | 200MB | 16GB |
In the ideal case, all three stages fits in GPU memory (totaling > 32GB). This exceeds the limit of every consumer GPU (except Apple M series with a large unified memory).
The only practical way to run FLUX is to "load, compute, unload" each model into GPU in sequence, at the cost of "reinitialize" each stage for each text2image inference.
This reduces the required GPU memory max(required_memory_per_stage) from sum(required_memory_per_stage), and requires the main memory to fit sum(size_of_model_weight).
Note:
- Stable Diffusion has the same architecture (three stages), and uses pipelining on consumer GPUs.
- Using a larger image size increases the resident memory proportionally for stage 2 and 3.
Case 2: Mixture of Experts (MoE) model
MoE models are self-explanatory. They used multiple small models to produce one inference result (e.g. the next token in LLMs).
Only one small model (say 1/8 size of the entire model) need to reside in GPU memory at a time. Each small model sequentially computes their result, then the results are merged into a single output token.
A high level pseudo code:
while output != END_OF_TEXT:
outputs = []
for small_model of small_models:
small_model.load_to_gpu()
out = small_model.predict_next_token()
outputs.append(out)
small_model.unload_from_gpu()
output_token = select_from_outputs(outputs)
emit_to_caller(output_token)
If the GPU has enough memory, all of the small models can reside in memory (load and unload becomes no-op). If not, the small models are repeatedly load to and unload from gpu (usually to/from main memory).
Some LLMs adopt an architecture where the number of activated params (model weight that has to reside in GPU memory) is much smaller than the number of total params (total size of model weight). I believe they functions similarly to MoE at inference time from memory usage standpoint.
Examples:
- Mixtral 8x7b
- DeepSeek v2 (236B total params, 21B activated param per token)
Case 3: Model Streaming
I observe this technique when playing with Ollama.
If the model weight is too big to fit into main memory, the model weight are streamed from disk during inference (e.g. the model will be read from disk N times for N predicted tokens).
It's slow (bottlenecked by disk throughput), but does allow large models inference to happen.
Current WebNN API
Case 1 and 2 are feasible but not efficient. Model pipelining and partitioning involves destroying and rebuilding the compute graph.
For every inference (e.g. generate one image from a text prompt, predict one token using MoE model), we need to:
- Copy model weights from JavaScript ArrayBuffers into WebNN service process
- And, call platform-specific API to build (with an optional, potentially expensive, fuze/optimize pass)
Case 3 is infeasible because the entire model weight needs to be copied to WebNN service process before we can build a graph. We can fallback to model partitioning, and convert the problem to case 2.
API / Spec Implication
The topic for discussion :)
Two primitives?
- Swap a built MLGraph between GPU/NPU memory and main memory (e.g. PyTorch
model.to(device)) - Memory mapping from file-on-disk to main memory (POSIX
mmapequivalent?)
Related spec / APIs I can think of:
- MLBuffer / MLTensor
- Fetch: Obtain a mmap-ed response?
- File System Access: mmap a file on disk (from
FileSystemFileHandle)? - WebGPU: Shader's compilation cache
- @reillyeon mentioned to me about introducing a caching mechanism for MLGraph (e.g. save it for later use and avoid repeated graph compilation). Said mechanism might help here.
- Lingua principale
- Bikeshed
- Stelle
- 566
- Fork
- 72
- Merge medio
- 6g 5h
- PR unite (30g)
- 1
Preparare l'ambiente
- Nessun Dockerfile né file Docker Compose
- Nessun modello di pull request
- Leggi la guida per i contributori
Come iniziare
- Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
- Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
- Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
- Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.
Altre issue di webmachinelearning/webnn
-
Difficoltà 5/5 Più di una settimana Idoneità per principianti 35/100
webmachinelearning/webnn#967 ·
-
Difficoltà 5/5 Più di una settimana Idoneità per principianti 25/100
webmachinelearning/webnn#966 · 1 commento ·
-
Difficoltà 5/5 Più di una settimana Idoneità per principianti 35/100
webmachinelearning/webnn#965 · 1 commento ·
-
Difficoltà 3/5 1-2 giorni Idoneità per principianti 68/100
webmachinelearning/webnn#964 · 1 commento · 1 reazione ·
-
Difficoltà 5/5 Più di una settimana Idoneità per principianti 30/100
webmachinelearning/webnn#963 · 2 commenti · 1 reazione ·
Tutte le issue di webmachinelearning/webnn
Issue simili
-
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 78/100
StellarState/SS-backend#712 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
area: api effort: S P2 type: bug
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 75/100
ferenyl/azuredevopstui#12 ·
-
area: backend bug
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 78/100
snapotter-hq/SnapOtter#3473 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
backroom bug
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 68/100
ditto-assistant/ditto-subnet#3069 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
harlan-agent-ready-to-implement routine:ci-review
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 78/100
harlan-zw/unlighthouse#455 · 2 commenti ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno