-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 33.1k
Processing Utils: honor pre-built sub-processor kwargs in from_pretrained #45627
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
Open
javierdejesusda
wants to merge
1
commit into
huggingface:main
Choose a base branch
from
javierdejesusda:fix/autoprocessor-honor-tokenizer-kwarg-44987
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+72
−2
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
not really sure about this. The error from GH issue is due to old remote code, and we don't yet support the Pi0-FAST natively in transformers. also cc @yonigozlan ig you might have seen similar issue when refactoring processor loading
We're planning native support though, and waiting for lerobot team to test and convert the configs correctly
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for taking a look, @zucchini-nlp!
Quick scope note: this PR isn't targeting the OP's zero-kwarg traceback (that's the hub layout / old remote code path you mentioned, which I agree is out of scope here and will be obsoleted by native support). It's targeting @ArthurZucker's follow-up comment on the issue:
The underlying behavior is general to
ProcessorMixin: when a caller supplies a pre-built sub-processor via kwargs (whethertokenizer=or the exact attribute name likebpe_tokenizer=), the instance is silently dropped and the loader tries to reload from disk anyway. Any processor with a non-primary tokenizer attribute runs into this, so native Pi0-FAST support wouldn't fix it on its own, it'd just mean one fewer processor hitting it.That said, happy to defer fully. If you and @yonigozlan / @ArthurZucker feel this should wait (or be folded into the native support work, or handled differently), I'm glad to close or rescope, just let me know.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yeah, totally get it. Personally, I think we can deliberately not support it as remote code and not-v5 compatible unless Arthur/Yoni have a different opinion