Refactor actor init message #2205
Closed
Conversation
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 makes it more clear that the actor init message can be creating at the same time as the call to allocate the python actor by refactoring ActorMesh._create. It gets inlined into the ProcMesh spawn code, and calls a method that returns the PythonMessage that is the init message. However, we currently _cannot_ remove the actual cast of the init message. This is because actor init itself uses the context of the init message to initialize its rank. This information is not available to the rust actor's init method so we cannot handle our init method from within it. Nevertheless, this change makes it clearer how to merge the init when it is possible. Differential Revision: [D89700862](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D89700862/) **NOTE FOR REVIEWERS**: This PR has internal Meta-specific changes or comments, please review them on [Phabricator](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D89700862/)! [ghstack-poisoned]
This was referenced Dec 22, 2025
Closed
zdevito
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 23, 2025
This makes it more clear that the actor init message can be creating at the same time as the call to allocate the python actor by refactoring ActorMesh._create. It gets inlined into the ProcMesh spawn code, and calls a method that returns the PythonMessage that is the init message. However, we currently _cannot_ remove the actual cast of the init message. This is because actor init itself uses the context of the init message to initialize its rank. This information is not available to the rust actor's init method so we cannot handle our init method from within it. Nevertheless, this change makes it clearer how to merge the init when it is possible. Differential Revision: [D89700862](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D89700862/) **NOTE FOR REVIEWERS**: This PR has internal Meta-specific changes or comments, please review them on [Phabricator](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D89700862/)! ghstack-source-id: 330922394 Pull Request resolved: #2205
meta-cla
bot
added
the
CLA Signed
This makes it more clear that the actor init message can be creating at the same time as the call to allocate the python actor by refactoring ActorMesh._create. It gets inlined into the ProcMesh spawn code, and calls a method that returns the PythonMessage that is the init message. However, we currently _cannot_ remove the actual cast of the init message. This is because actor init itself uses the context of the init message to initialize its rank. This information is not available to the rust actor's init method so we cannot handle our init method from within it. Nevertheless, this change makes it clearer how to merge the init when it is possible. Differential Revision: [D89700862](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D89700862/) **NOTE FOR REVIEWERS**: This PR has internal Meta-specific changes or comments, please review them on [Phabricator](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D89700862/)! [ghstack-poisoned]
zdevito
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 23, 2025
Pull Request resolved: #2205 This makes it more clear that the actor init message can be creating at the same time as the call to allocate the python actor by refactoring ActorMesh._create. It gets inlined into the ProcMesh spawn code, and calls a method that returns the PythonMessage that is the init message. However, we currently _cannot_ remove the actual cast of the init message. This is because actor init itself uses the context of the init message to initialize its rank. This information is not available to the rust actor's init method so we cannot handle our init method from within it. Nevertheless, this change makes it clearer how to merge the init when it is possible. Differential Revision: [D89700862](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D89700862/) **NOTE FOR REVIEWERS**: This PR has internal Meta-specific changes or comments, please review them on [Phabricator](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D89700862/)! ghstack-source-id: 331002976
|
This pull request has been merged in 8d4884d. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Stack from ghstack (oldest at bottom):
This makes it more clear that the actor init message can be creating at the same time as the call to allocate the python actor by refactoring ActorMesh._create. It gets inlined into the ProcMesh spawn code, and calls a method that returns the PythonMessage that is the init message.
However, we currently cannot remove the actual cast of the init message. This is because actor init itself uses the context of the init message to initialize its rank. This information is not available to the rust actor's init method so we cannot handle our init method from within it.
Nevertheless, this change makes it clearer how to merge the init when it is possible.
Differential Revision: D89700862
NOTE FOR REVIEWERS: This PR has internal Meta-specific changes or comments, please review them on Phabricator!