Files
lerobot-clone/examples/rtc/PROFILING_GUIDE.md

264 lines
8.3 KiB
Markdown
Raw Normal View History

2025-11-18 09:51:50 +01:00
# RTC Profiling Guide
This guide explains how to profile RTC (Real-Time Chunking) performance to identify bottlenecks and understand why RTC might be slower than expected.
## Quick Start
### 1. Profile with Real Robot (Profiled Version)
Use `eval_with_real_robot_profiled.py` to profile actual robot execution:
```bash
# With RTC enabled
uv run examples/rtc/eval_with_real_robot_profiled.py \
--policy.path=helper2424/pi05_check_rtc \
--policy.device=mps \
--rtc.enabled=true \
--rtc.execution_horizon=20 \
--robot.type=so100_follower \
--robot.port=/dev/tty.usbmodem58FA0834591 \
--robot.id=so100_follower \
--robot.cameras="{ gripper: {type: opencv, index_or_path: 0, width: 640, height: 480, fps: 30}, front: {type: opencv, index_or_path: 1, width: 640, height: 480, fps: 30}}" \
--task="Move green small object into the purple platform" \
--duration=30
# Without RTC for comparison
uv run examples/rtc/eval_with_real_robot_profiled.py \
--policy.path=helper2424/pi05_check_rtc \
--policy.device=mps \
--rtc.enabled=false \
--robot.type=so100_follower \
--robot.port=/dev/tty.usbmodem58FA0834591 \
--robot.id=so100_follower \
--robot.cameras="{ gripper: {type: opencv, index_or_path: 0, width: 640, height: 480, fps: 30}, front: {type: opencv, index_or_path: 1, width: 640, height: 480, fps: 30}}" \
--task="Move green small object into the purple platform" \
--duration=30
```
**Output**: At the end of execution, you'll see a detailed breakdown of timing for each component:
- `get_actions.policy_inference` - Time spent in policy inference
- `get_actions.preprocessing` - Time spent preprocessing observations
- `get_actions.postprocessing` - Time spent postprocessing actions
- `get_actions.action_queue_merge` - Time spent merging actions with RTC
- `robot.get_observation` - Time to get observations from robot
- `robot.send_action` - Time to send actions to robot
- And more...
### 2. Profile Without Robot (Comparison Script)
Use `profile_rtc_comparison.py` to profile just the policy inference without needing a robot:
```bash
uv run examples/rtc/profile_rtc_comparison.py \
--policy_path=helper2424/pi05_check_rtc \
--device=mps \
--num_iterations=50 \
--execution_horizon=20
```
**Output**: Side-by-side comparison of performance with and without RTC, including:
- Mean/min/max inference times
- Throughput (iterations per second)
- Verdict on whether RTC is faster or slower
### 3. Enable Detailed Method-Level Profiling
For even more granular profiling, add the `--enable_detailed_profiling` flag:
```bash
uv run examples/rtc/profile_rtc_comparison.py \
--policy_path=helper2424/pi05_check_rtc \
--device=mps \
--num_iterations=50 \
--execution_horizon=20 \
--enable_detailed_profiling
```
This will show timing for individual methods within the policy.
## Understanding the Output
### Key Metrics to Look At
1. **get_actions.policy_inference** - This should be the largest component
- If RTC is enabled, this includes the RTC guidance overhead
- Compare this with/without RTC to see the overhead
2. **get_actions.preprocessing** - Image preprocessing and normalization
- Should be relatively fast
- If slow, consider optimizing image processing
3. **get_actions.postprocessing** - Action denormalization
- Should be minimal
- If slow, check postprocessor implementation
4. **get_actions.action_queue_merge** - RTC-specific merging logic
- Only present when RTC is enabled
- If this is taking significant time, the RTC algorithm may need optimization
5. **robot.get_observation** - Robot communication overhead
- If slow, check camera/sensor latency
- Consider reducing image resolution
6. **robot.send_action** - Action execution overhead
- Should be very fast
- If slow, check robot communication
### Expected Performance
For a typical Pi0 policy on Apple Silicon (MPS):
- **Without RTC**: ~100-200ms per inference
- **With RTC**: Should be similar or slightly faster due to action reuse
- **Preprocessing**: ~5-20ms depending on number of cameras
- **Postprocessing**: ~1-5ms
If RTC is significantly slower, likely causes:
1. **RTC overhead exceeds benefits** - The guidance computation is expensive
2. **Execution horizon too small** - Not reusing enough actions to amortize overhead
3. **No compilation** - Try with `--use_torch_compile`
4. **Large prev_actions buffer** - Copying/processing previous actions is slow
## Profiling Your Own Code
### Using the Profiling Decorator
Add profiling to your own methods:
```python
from lerobot.utils.profiling import profile_method, enable_profiling, print_profiling_summary
# Enable profiling
enable_profiling()
# Decorate methods you want to profile
@profile_method
def my_slow_function(x):
# ... your code ...
return result
# At end of execution
print_profiling_summary()
```
### Using Profile Context Manager
For profiling specific code blocks:
```python
from lerobot.utils.profiling import profile_section, enable_profiling
enable_profiling()
with profile_section("data_loading"):
data = load_data()
with profile_section("model_inference"):
output = model(data)
```
### Adding Profiling to Policy Methods
To profile specific parts of the Pi0 policy, you can add decorators:
```python
# In src/lerobot/policies/pi0/modeling_pi0.py
from lerobot.utils.profiling import profile_method, profile_section
class Pi0Policy:
@profile_method
def predict_action_chunk(self, obs, inference_delay=0, prev_chunk_left_over=None):
# ... existing code ...
pass
def _generate_actions_with_rtc(self, ...):
with profile_section("rtc.guidance_computation"):
# ... guidance code ...
pass
with profile_section("rtc.action_merging"):
# ... merging code ...
pass
```
## Analyzing Results
### Comparison Checklist
When comparing RTC vs non-RTC performance, check:
- [ ] Is `policy_inference` time higher with RTC?
- [ ] Is `action_queue_merge` taking significant time?
- [ ] Are you running enough iterations to amortize warmup?
- [ ] Is torch.compile enabled for fair comparison?
- [ ] Is the execution horizon large enough? (should be >= 10-20)
- [ ] Are you testing on the same hardware/device?
### Common Bottlenecks
1. **Image preprocessing dominates**
- Solution: Reduce image resolution, use fewer cameras, or optimize preprocessing
2. **Action queue operations are slow**
- Solution: Review queue implementation, consider using ring buffer
3. **RTC guidance is expensive**
- Solution: Reduce guidance weight, simplify guidance computation, use torch.compile
4. **Robot communication is slow**
- Solution: Increase baud rate, reduce action frequency, optimize protocol
5. **Memory allocation overhead**
- Solution: Pre-allocate buffers, reuse tensors, avoid unnecessary copies
## Advanced: Adding Custom Metrics
You can add custom timing metrics to the profiled script:
```python
from lerobot.utils.profiling import record_timing
start = time.perf_counter()
# ... your code ...
duration = time.perf_counter() - start
record_timing("my_custom_metric", duration)
```
## Troubleshooting
### Profiling shows RTC is slower by >50%
1. Check if torch.compile is enabled: `--use_torch_compile`
2. Increase execution horizon: `--rtc.execution_horizon=30`
3. Verify inference_delay is calculated correctly
4. Profile with `--enable_detailed_profiling` to find exact bottleneck
### Profiling output is empty
1. Make sure profiling is enabled with `enable_profiling()`
2. Verify you're running enough iterations (at least 10)
3. Check that code is actually executing (not short-circuited)
### Inconsistent results between runs
1. Run more iterations: `--num_iterations=100`
2. Increase warmup iterations
3. Check for thermal throttling on device
4. Ensure no other processes competing for resources
## Next Steps
1. Run both profiling scripts (with/without robot)
2. Compare timing breakdowns
3. Identify the largest bottleneck
4. Focus optimization efforts on that component
5. Re-run profiling to verify improvements
## Questions?
If profiling reveals unexpected bottlenecks or you need help interpreting results, please share:
- The full profiling output
- Your configuration (RTC enabled/disabled, execution horizon, etc.)
- Hardware specs (device type, memory, etc.)
- Policy type and size