TensorRT produces wrong results since the CumSum operator produces identical outputs for different 'reverse' attribute
@kevinch-nv is already working on this.
Since Aug 18, 2025.
- Dominant language
- C++
- Stars
- 13.4k
- Forks
- 2.4k
- Avg merge
- 5d 3h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 2
Description
Description
For the following simple onnx model,
the only difference for the two CumSum operators is the 'reverse' attribute. 'output1' and 'output2' should be different. However, when I run it using tensorrt, 'output1' and 'output2' are identical.
The results produced by tensorrt are as follows:
TensorRT:
[array([[[-1.3519955 , -0.7268443 , -0.1298989 , -0.26899588,
0.00713499],
[ 0.02994417, 0.09074355, 0.01346359, -0.08502126,
1.2606536 ],
[-2.9652479 , -0.7773497 , -0.7120025 , -2.4827871 ,
-1.1241275 ],
[ 5.4411387 , 4.2780757 , 2.7492511 , 1.1518208 ,
1.2441877 ]],
[[ 0.6803112 , 1.1280711 , 0.92128164, 0.65729713,
1.0393754 ],
[ 4.3415256 , 2.2513127 , 2.7186024 , 0.8549059 ,
-0.38409668],
[-3.9618876 , -3.6651313 , -1.5512493 , -0.29409987,
-0.48622572],
[ 0.45760983, -0.92412144, -1.1371686 , -1.261433 ,
-1.4493794 ]],
[[-1.8433855 , -2.2286081 , -2.786633 , -1.7782474 ,
-1.9025584 ],
[ 1.0052809 , 2.1252763 , 3.09984 , 2.5171452 ,
3.0486135 ],
[ 2.4097364 , 2.1245673 , 0.9027792 , 0.77380884,
0.20755884],
[ 1.6885381 , 0.859954 , 1.7572367 , 2.2161024 ,
1.3712262 ]]], dtype=float32),
array([[[-1.3519955 , -0.7268443 , -0.1298989 , -0.26899588,
0.00713499],
[ 0.02994417, 0.09074355, 0.01346359, -0.08502126,
1.2606536 ],
[-2.9652479 , -0.7773497 , -0.7120025 , -2.4827871 ,
-1.1241275 ],
[ 5.4411387 , 4.2780757 , 2.7492511 , 1.1518208 ,
1.2441877 ]],
[[ 0.6803112 , 1.1280711 , 0.92128164, 0.65729713,
1.0393754 ],
[ 4.3415256 , 2.2513127 , 2.7186024 , 0.8549059 ,
-0.38409668],
[-3.9618876 , -3.6651313 , -1.5512493 , -0.29409987,
-0.48622572],
[ 0.45760983, -0.92412144, -1.1371686 , -1.261433 ,
-1.4493794 ]],
[[-1.8433855 , -2.2286081 , -2.786633 , -1.7782474 ,
-1.9025584 ],
[ 1.0052809 , 2.1252763 , 3.09984 , 2.5171452 ,
3.0486135 ],
[ 2.4097364 , 2.1245673 , 0.9027792 , 0.77380884,
0.20755884],
[ 1.6885381 , 0.859954 , 1.7572367 , 2.2161024 ,
1.3712262 ]]], dtype=float32)]
This model can also be executed by onnxruntime, the results are as follows:
ONNXRuntime:
[array([[[-0.6251511 , -1.2220965 , -1.08299953, -1.35913041,
-1.35199542],
[-0.06079938, 0.01648058, 0.11496543, -1.23070944,
0.02994417],
[-2.18789816, -2.25324535, -0.48246073, -1.84112047,
-2.96524798],
[ 1.16306293, 2.69188762, 4.28931797, 4.19695108,
5.44113879]],
[[-0.4477599 , -0.24097046, 0.02301404, -0.35906422,
0.6803112 ],
[ 2.09021282, 1.62292314, 3.48661971, 4.7256223 ,
4.34152561],
[-0.29675618, -2.41063824, -3.66778758, -3.47566174,
-3.96188746],
[ 1.38173127, 1.59477848, 1.71904282, 1.90698928,
0.45760983]],
[[ 0.38522267, 0.94324744, -0.0651381 , 0.05917305,
-1.8433854 ],
[-1.11999547, -2.09455901, -1.5118643 , -2.0433327 ,
1.00528085],
[ 0.28516909, 1.50695714, 1.63592756, 2.20217758,
2.40973642],
[ 0.82858407, -0.06869864, -0.52756426, 0.31731185,
1.68853804]]]),
array([[[-1.35199542, -0.72684432, -0.12989892, -0.26899589,
0.00713499],
[ 0.02994417, 0.09074355, 0.01346359, -0.08502126,
1.26065361],
[-2.96524798, -0.77734982, -0.71200264, -2.48278725,
-1.12412751],
[ 5.44113879, 4.27807586, 2.74925117, 1.15182082,
1.24418771]],
[[ 0.6803112 , 1.1280711 , 0.92128167, 0.65729716,
1.03937542],
[ 4.34152561, 2.25131279, 2.71860248, 0.8549059 ,
-0.38409668],
[-3.96188746, -3.66513129, -1.55124922, -0.29409988,
-0.48622572],
[ 0.45760983, -0.92412144, -1.13716865, -1.26143299,
-1.44937944]],
[[-1.8433854 , -2.22860807, -2.78663284, -1.7782473 ,
-1.90255845],
[ 1.00528085, 2.12527633, 3.09983987, 2.51714516,
3.04861355],
[ 2.40973642, 2.12456733, 0.90277928, 0.77380887,
0.20755884],
[ 1.68853804, 0.85995397, 1.75723669, 2.2161023 ,
1.37122619]]])]
From the above results, we can see that the first results of tensorrt and onnxruntime are different, 93.3% elements are mismatched.
Mismatched elements: 56 / 60 (93.3%)
Max absolute difference among violations: 4.7256223
Max relative difference among violations: 41.78038425
Environment
TensorRT Version: 10.12.0.36
NVIDIA GPU: GeForce RTX 3080
NVIDIA Driver Version: 535.183.01
CUDA Version: 12.2
CUDNN Version: none
Operating System: ubuntu 20.04
Python Version (if applicable): 3.12.9
Steps To Reproduce
This issue can be reproduced by the following code with the model in the attachment.
from typing import Dict, List, Literal, Optional
import sys
import os
import numpy as np
import onnx
import onnxruntime
import tensorrt as trt
import pycuda.driver as cuda
import pycuda.autoinit
import argparse
import pickle
def test():
onnx_model = onnx.load('333.onnx')
with open("inputs.pkl", "rb") as fp:
inputs = pickle.load(fp)
try:
ort_session = onnxruntime.InferenceSession(
onnx_model.SerializeToString(), providers=["CPUExecutionProvider"]
)
ort_output = ort_session.run([], inputs)
except Exception as e:
print(e)
print("This model cannot be executed by onnxruntime!")
sys.exit(1)
print("ONNXRuntime:\n", ort_output)
#--------------------------------------------------------
trt_logger = trt.Logger(trt.Logger.WARNING)
trt.init_libnvinfer_plugins(trt_logger, '')
builder = trt.Builder(trt_logger)
network = builder.create_network(flags=1 << int(trt.NetworkDefinitionCreationFlag.EXPLICIT_BATCH))
parser = trt.OnnxParser(network, trt_logger)
with open('333.onnx', 'rb') as model_file:
if not parser.parse(model_file.read()):
for error in range(parser.num_errors):
print(parser.get_error(error))
sys.exit(1)
config = builder.create_builder_config()
serialized_engine = builder.build_serialized_network(network, config)
if serialized_engine == None:
sys.exit(1)
with open("engine.trt", "wb") as f:
f.write(serialized_engine)
with open("engine.trt", "rb") as f, trt.Runtime(trt_logger) as runtime:
engine = runtime.deserialize_cuda_engine(f.read())
context = engine.create_execution_context()
inputs_trt, outputs_trt, bindings = [], [], []
stream = cuda.Stream()
input_name = []
output_shape_dtype = []
#------------------------------------------------------------
for binding in engine:
size = trt.volume(engine.get_tensor_shape(binding))
dtype = trt.nptype(engine.get_tensor_dtype(binding))
host_mem = cuda.pagelocked_empty(size, dtype)
device_mem = cuda.mem_alloc(host_mem.nbytes)
bindings.append({'name':binding, 'address':int(device_mem)})
if engine.get_tensor_mode(binding) == trt.TensorIOMode.INPUT:
inputs_trt.append({'host': host_mem, 'device': device_mem})
input_name.append(binding)
else:
outputs_trt.append({'host': host_mem, 'device': device_mem})
output_shape = engine.get_tensor_shape(binding)
output_shape_dtype.append({'shape':output_shape, 'dtype':dtype})
for i, input_mem in enumerate(inputs_trt):
inp = np.ravel(inputs[input_name[i]])
np.copyto(input_mem['host'], inp)
cuda.memcpy_htod_async(input_mem['device'], input_mem['host'], stream)
for bind in bindings:
name = bind['name']
addr = bind['address']
context.set_tensor_address(name, addr)
context.execute_async_v3(stream_handle=stream.handle)
trt_output = []
for i, output_mem in enumerate(outputs_trt):
cuda.memcpy_dtoh_async(output_mem['host'], output_mem['device'], stream)
out_shape = output_shape_dtype[i]['shape']
out = output_mem['host'].reshape(out_shape)
trt_output.append(out)
stream.synchronize()
print("TensorRT: \n", trt_output)
assert len(ort_output) == len(trt_output), "Unequal number of outputs"
np.testing.assert_allclose(trt_output[1], ort_output[1], rtol=0.1, atol=0.1) # OK
np.testing.assert_allclose(trt_output[0], ort_output[0], rtol=0.1, atol=0.1) # BAD
if __name__ == "__main__":
test()
Commands or scripts:
Have you tried the latest release?: yes
Can this model run on other frameworks? For example run ONNX model with ONNXRuntime (polygraphy run <model.onnx> --onnxrt): the mode can be executed by onnxruntime.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Assessment
This issue has not been assessed yet.