[EZ] Pass seed to data sampler.

[EugenHotaj]

We currently hardcode zero. I assume this is not intentional.

Context

What is the purpose of this PR? Is it to

• add a new feature
• fix a bug
• update tests and/or documentation
• other (please add here)

Please link to any issues this PR addresses.

Changelog

What are the changes made in this PR?

• As titled

Test plan

Please make sure to do each of the following if applicable to your PR. If you're unsure about any one of these just ask and we will happily help. We also have a contributing page for some guidance on contributing.

• run pre-commit hooks and linters (make sure you've first installed via pre-commit install)
• add unit tests for any new functionality
• update docstrings for any new or updated methods or classes
• run unit tests via pytest tests
• run recipe tests via pytest tests -m integration_test
• manually run any new or modified recipes with sufficient proof of correctness
• include relevant commands and any other artifacts in this summary (pastes of loss curves, eval results, etc.)

UX

If your function changed a public API, please add a dummy example of what the user experience will look like when calling it.
Here is a docstring example
and a tutorial example

• I did not change any public API
• I have added an example to docs or docstrings

[pytorch-bot]

🔗 Helpful Links

🧪 See artifacts and rendered test results at hud.pytorch.org/pr/pytorch/torchtune/2266

• 📄 Preview Python docs built from this PR

Note: Links to docs will display an error until the docs builds have been completed.

❌ 2 New Failures, 4 Unrelated Failures

As of commit 41147aa with merge base 97e857f ():

NEW FAILURES - The following jobs have failed:

• GPU tests / gpu_test (3.11, stable) (gh)
  tests/recipes/test_qat_lora_finetune_distributed.py::TestQATLoRAFinetuneDistributedRecipe::test_training_state_on_resume[llama3/8B_qat_lora-llama3-tune-False]
• Recipe Tests / recipe_test (3.10) (gh)
  tests/recipes/test_ppo_full_finetune_single_device.py::TestPPOFullFinetuneSingleDeviceRecipe::test_loss

FLAKY - The following jobs failed but were likely due to flakiness present on trunk:

• Recipe Tests / recipe_test (3.11) (gh) (similar failure)
  ##[error]The operation was canceled.
• Recipe Tests / recipe_test (3.9) (gh) (similar failure)
  ##[error]The operation was canceled.

BROKEN TRUNK - The following jobs failed but were present on the merge base:

👉 Rebase onto the `viable/strict` branch to avoid these failures

• GPU tests / gpu_test (3.10, stable) (gh) (trunk failure)
  ##[error]The operation was canceled.
• GPU tests / gpu_test (3.9, stable) (gh) (trunk failure)
  ##[error]The operation was canceled.

This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI and updates every 15 minutes.

[RdoubleA]

Getting the seed from self.seed is risky, since we are using self.seed = training.set_seed() in our recipes, which will actually return a different seed on every rank. I am not sure if the sampler should have the same seed across ranks, but I imagine to ensure all ranks are not shuffling the data differently we would want the same seed. It would be better to set it from cfg.seed directly to keep the same data seed across all ranks.

Tagging @andrewkho for thoughts on setting the seed in DistributedSampler.

[EugenHotaj]

@RdoubleA I might be misunderstanding the code but I thought set_seed returned the seed you passed it in from the config (or if you don't pass anything, a global seed). I guess my intention here is to just pass in the seed from the config. Lmk if there is a better way to do it (maybe pass in cfg.seed directly?)

[RdoubleA]

Ah my bad, you're right. It's returning the global seed not the local seed. In that case this should be ok

[RdoubleA]

@EugenHotaj actually we might need to do something like this to get the seed directly from the config and maintaining BC with existing configs:
seed=cfg.get("seed", None) or 0

[EugenHotaj]

@RdoubleA done

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 64.13%. Comparing base (97e857f) to head (41147aa).
Report is 8 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
recipes/ppo_full_finetune_single_device.py	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
recipes/knowledge_distillation_single_device.py	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##            main    #2266       +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   8.97%   64.13%   +55.15%     
==========================================
  Files        305      353       +48     
  Lines      18166    20679     +2513     
==========================================
+ Hits        1631    13262    +11631     
+ Misses     16535     7417     -9118     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.