Repository: pytorch/benchmark
Issue: [torchao] Dashboard numbers are missing even when the workflow is succeeded 
Root cause: Configuration Error

TorchAO workflow has fixed a bug (https://github.com/pytorch/benchmark/commit/bf0e5a965b9476b58324017dbf025e859894abb9) and should give reasonable numbers right now, the workflow also succeeded: https://github.com/pytorch/benchmark/actions/workflows/torchao.yml

However, we do not see numbers are updated on the TorchAO dashboard: https://hud.pytorch.org/benchmark/torchao

Only the huggingface numbers are available and only the autoquant numbers are correct:

<img width="1871" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/09920674-181b-48b0-bc92-fc63f75cc807">


Is this because the PR to benchmark is not merged? https://github.com/pytorch/benchmark/pull/2394


Looks like something wrong with ShipIt, trying to fix.

Actually the commit from https://github.com/pytorch/benchmark/pull/2394 already in main, the PR can probably be just closed. This should be irrelevant to the actual issue.

I think we can close https://github.com/pytorch/benchmark/issues/2405, but this is an independent problem

I looked at ossci-metrics/torchbench-csv/torchao/ on AWS and it doesn't have any recent runs, only couple of runs from Jun 7 and Jun 8.
Investigating.

If you look at https://github.com/pytorch/benchmark/actions/runs/10408276046/job/28825370645, WORKFLOW_RUN_ID and WORKFLOW_RUN_ATTEMPT are empty.

@kit1980 I am curious where are the data reported by the dashboard coming from? https://hud.pytorch.org/benchmark/torchao For example, I can see the latest commit hash is b523f9fe1 (2024/08/18)

I've realized the data is actually in s3, but because WORKFLOW_RUN_ID and WORKFLOW_RUN_ATTEMPT are not populated, that path to the data includes two literal /, so I missed it.

https://github.com/pytorch/benchmark/pull/2426 fixed WORKFLOW_RUN_ID problem.
Now https://hud.pytorch.org/benchmark/torchao shows the data.
The torchbench part of the run is still in progress, will need to look closely if the data correct later.

Yeah data doesn't look correct quite yet - cc @HDCharles 

> Yeah data doesn't look correct quite yet

There was a conflict between my manual run and a nightly run.
It was looking differently at some point, with TorchBench, HF, and TIMM data populated.

Let's wait for the result's of today's nightly run.


Hm, now we have TorchBench and TIMM, but no HF
![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/b61bf55a-b5ac-4986-9bc7-d2702df3add5)
Investigating further.

OK, I debugged the reason for missing HF.

HF is the fastest part (7 hours) vs 17-20 hours for TorchBench and TIMM.
Because of that, HF part computed the data for older commit 9860194881, while TorchBench and TIMM used newer commit 0ed30902e3.

So if you select 9860194881 on the right, it will show only HF.
Selecting 0ed30902e3 will show TorchBench and TIMM.
This is reflecting the data and should be less frequent if we can make the benchmarks shorter.

Direct link to an older date that shows the data for all three:

https://hud.pytorch.org/benchmark/torchao?dashboard=torchao&startTime=Fri%2C%2016%20Aug%202024%2023%3A16%3A34%20GMT&stopTime=Fri%2C%2023%20Aug%202024%2023%3A16%3A34%20GMT&granularity=hour&suite=torchbench&mode=inference&dtype=bfloat16&deviceName=cuda%20(a100)&lBranch=main&lCommit=227d4bfece6bb00f0365642ad1d7afd509079ba4&rBranch=main&rCommit=b523f9f9e15b6fb80d10f585d9cf45e0c5e4d10e