PiperOrigin-RevId: 521553151
21 KiB
layout | target | title | parent | nav_order |
---|---|---|---|---|
forward | https://developers.google.com/mediapipe/framework/framework_concepts/graphs_cpp | Building Graphs in C++ | Graphs | 1 |
Building Graphs in C++
{: .no_toc }
- TOC {:toc}
Attention: Thanks for your interest in MediaPipe! We have moved to https://developers.google.com/mediapipe as the primary developer documentation site for MediaPipe as of April 3, 2023.
C++ graph builder is a powerful tool for:
- Building complex graphs
- Parametrizing graphs (e.g. setting a delegate on
InferenceCalculator
, enabling/disabling parts of the graph) - Deduplicating graphs (e.g. instead of CPU and GPU dedicated graphs in pbtxt you can have a single code that constructs required graphs, sharing as much as possible)
- Supporting optional graph inputs/outputs
- Customizing graphs per platform
Basic Usage
Let's see how C++ graph builder can be used for a simple graph:
# Graph inputs.
input_stream: "input_tensors"
input_side_packet: "model"
# Graph outputs.
output_stream: "output_tensors"
node {
calculator: "InferenceCalculator"
input_stream: "TENSORS:input_tensors"
input_side_packet: "MODEL:model"
output_stream: "TENSORS:output_tensors"
node_options: {
[type.googleapis.com/mediapipe.InferenceCalculatorOptions] {
# Requesting GPU delegate.
delegate { gpu {} }
}
}
}
Function to build the above CalculatorGraphConfig
may look like:
CalculatorGraphConfig BuildGraph() {
Graph graph;
// Graph inputs.
Stream<std::vector<Tensor>> input_tensors =
graph.In(0).SetName("input_tensors").Cast<std::vector<Tensor>>();
SidePacket<TfLiteModelPtr> model =
graph.SideIn(0).SetName("model").Cast<TfLiteModelPtr>();
auto& inference_node = graph.AddNode("InferenceCalculator");
auto& inference_opts =
inference_node.GetOptions<InferenceCalculatorOptions>();
// Requesting GPU delegate.
inference_opts.mutable_delegate()->mutable_gpu();
input_tensors.ConnectTo(inference_node.In("TENSORS"));
model.ConnectTo(inference_node.SideIn("MODEL"));
Stream<std::vector<Tensor>> output_tensors =
inference_node.Out("TENSORS").Cast<std::vector<Tensor>>();
// Graph outputs.
output_tensors.SetName("output_tensors").ConnectTo(graph.Out(0));
// Get `CalculatorGraphConfig` to pass it into `CalculatorGraph`
return graph.GetConfig();
}
Short summary:
- Use
Graph::In/SideIn
to get graph inputs asStream/SidePacket
- Use
Node::Out/SideOut
to get node outputs asStream/SidePacket
- Use
Stream/SidePacket::ConnectTo
to connect streams and side packets to node inputs (Node::In/SideIn
) and graph outputs (Graph::Out/SideOut
)- There's a "shortcut" operator
>>
that you can use instead ofConnectTo
function (E.g.x >> node.In("IN")
).
- There's a "shortcut" operator
Stream/SidePacket::Cast
is used to cast stream or side packet ofAnyType
(E.g.Stream<AnyType> in = graph.In(0);
) to a particular type- Using actual types instead of
AnyType
sets you on a better path for unleashing graph builder capabilities and improving your graphs readability.
- Using actual types instead of
Advanced Usage
Utility Functions
Let's extract inference construction code into a dedicated utility function to help for readability and code reuse:
// Updates graph to run inference.
Stream<std::vector<Tensor>> RunInference(
Stream<std::vector<Tensor>> tensors, SidePacket<TfLiteModelPtr> model,
const InferenceCalculatorOptions::Delegate& delegate, Graph& graph) {
auto& inference_node = graph.AddNode("InferenceCalculator");
auto& inference_opts =
inference_node.GetOptions<InferenceCalculatorOptions>();
*inference_opts.mutable_delegate() = delegate;
tensors.ConnectTo(inference_node.In("TENSORS"));
model.ConnectTo(inference_node.SideIn("MODEL"));
return inference_node.Out("TENSORS").Cast<std::vector<Tensor>>();
}
CalculatorGraphConfig BuildGraph() {
Graph graph;
// Graph inputs.
Stream<std::vector<Tensor>> input_tensors =
graph.In(0).SetName("input_tensors").Cast<std::vector<Tensor>>();
SidePacket<TfLiteModelPtr> model =
graph.SideIn(0).SetName("model").Cast<TfLiteModelPtr>();
InferenceCalculatorOptions::Delegate delegate;
delegate.mutable_gpu();
Stream<std::vector<Tensor>> output_tensors =
RunInference(input_tensors, model, delegate, graph);
// Graph outputs.
output_tensors.SetName("output_tensors").ConnectTo(graph.Out(0));
return graph.GetConfig();
}
As a result, RunInference
provides a clear interface stating what are the
inputs/outputs and their types.
It can be easily reused, e.g. it's only a few lines if you want to run an extra model inference:
// Run first inference.
Stream<std::vector<Tensor>> output_tensors =
RunInference(input_tensors, model, delegate, graph);
// Run second inference on the output of the first one.
Stream<std::vector<Tensor>> extra_output_tensors =
RunInference(output_tensors, extra_model, delegate, graph);
And you don't need to duplicate names and tags (InferenceCalculator
,
TENSORS
, MODEL
) or introduce dedicated constants here and there - those
details are localized to RunInference
function.
Tip: extracting RunInference
and similar functions to dedicated modules (e.g.
inference.h/cc which depends on the inference calculator) enables reuse in
graphs construction code and helps automatically pull in calculator dependencies
(e.g. no need to manually add :inference_calculator
dep, just let your IDE
include inference.h
and build cleaner pull in corresponding dependency).
Utility Classes
And surely, it's not only about functions, in some cases it's beneficial to introduce utility classes which can help making your graph construction code more readable and less error prone.
MediaPipe offers PassThroughCalculator
calculator, which is simply passing
through its inputs:
input_stream: "float_value"
input_stream: "int_value"
input_stream: "bool_value"
output_stream: "passed_float_value"
output_stream: "passed_int_value"
output_stream: "passed_bool_value"
node {
calculator: "PassThroughCalculator"
input_stream: "float_value"
input_stream: "int_value"
input_stream: "bool_value"
# The order must be the same as for inputs (or you can use explicit indexes)
output_stream: "passed_float_value"
output_stream: "passed_int_value"
output_stream: "passed_bool_value"
}
Let's see the straightforward C++ construction code to create the above graph:
CalculatorGraphConfig BuildGraph() {
Graph graph;
// Graph inputs.
Stream<float> float_value = graph.In(0).SetName("float_value").Cast<float>();
Stream<int> int_value = graph.In(1).SetName("int_value").Cast<int>();
Stream<bool> bool_value = graph.In(2).SetName("bool_value").Cast<bool>();
auto& pass_node = graph.AddNode("PassThroughCalculator");
float_value.ConnectTo(pass_node.In("")[0]);
int_value.ConnectTo(pass_node.In("")[1]);
bool_value.ConnectTo(pass_node.In("")[2]);
Stream<float> passed_float_value = pass_node.Out("")[0].Cast<float>();
Stream<int> passed_int_value = pass_node.Out("")[1].Cast<int>();
Stream<bool> passed_bool_value = pass_node.Out("")[2].Cast<bool>();
// Graph outputs.
passed_float_value.SetName("passed_float_value").ConnectTo(graph.Out(0));
passed_int_value.SetName("passed_int_value").ConnectTo(graph.Out(1));
passed_bool_value.SetName("passed_bool_value").ConnectTo(graph.Out(2));
// Get `CalculatorGraphConfig` to pass it into `CalculatorGraph`
return graph.GetConfig();
}
While pbtxt
representation maybe error prone (when we have many inputs to pass
through), C++ code looks even worse: repeated empty tags and Cast
calls. Let's
see how we can do better by introducing a PassThroughNodeBuilder
:
class PassThroughNodeBuilder {
public:
explicit PassThroughNodeBuilder(Graph& graph)
: node_(graph.AddNode("PassThroughCalculator")) {}
template <typename T>
Stream<T> PassThrough(Stream<T> stream) {
stream.ConnectTo(node_.In(index_));
return node_.Out(index_++).Cast<T>();
}
private:
int index_ = 0;
GenericNode& node_;
};
And now graph construction code can look like:
CalculatorGraphConfig BuildGraph() {
Graph graph;
// Graph inputs.
Stream<float> float_value = graph.In(0).SetName("float_value").Cast<float>();
Stream<int> int_value = graph.In(1).SetName("int_value").Cast<int>();
Stream<bool> bool_value = graph.In(2).SetName("bool_value").Cast<bool>();
PassThroughNodeBuilder pass_node_builder(graph);
Stream<float> passed_float_value = pass_node_builder.PassThrough(float_value);
Stream<int> passed_int_value = pass_node_builder.PassThrough(int_value);
Stream<bool> passed_bool_value = pass_node_builder.PassThrough(bool_value);
// Graph outputs.
passed_float_value.SetName("passed_float_value").ConnectTo(graph.Out(0));
passed_int_value.SetName("passed_int_value").ConnectTo(graph.Out(1));
passed_bool_value.SetName("passed_bool_value").ConnectTo(graph.Out(2));
// Get `CalculatorGraphConfig` to pass it into `CalculatorGraph`
return graph.GetConfig();
}
Now you can't have incorrect order or index in your pass through construction
code and save some typing by guessing the type for Cast
from the PassThrough
input.
Tip: the same as for the RunInference
function, extracting
PassThroughNodeBuilder
and similar utility classes into dedicated modules
enables reuse in graph construction code and helps to automatically pull in the
corresponding calculator dependencies.
Dos and Don'ts
Define graph inputs at the very beginning if possible
Stream<D> RunSomething(Stream<A> a, Stream<B> b, Graph& graph) {
Stream<C> c = graph.In(2).SetName("c").Cast<C>(); // Bad.
// ...
}
CalculatorGraphConfig BuildGraph() {
Graph graph;
Stream<A> a = graph.In(0).SetName("a").Cast<A>();
// 10/100/N lines of code.
Stream<B> b = graph.In(1).SetName("b").Cast<B>() // Bad.
Stream<D> d = RunSomething(a, b, graph);
// ...
return graph.GetConfig();
}
In the above code:
- It can be hard to guess how many inputs you have in the graph.
- Can be error prone overall and hard to maintain in future (e.g. is it a correct index? name? what if some inputs are removed or made optional? etc.).
RunSomething
reuse is limited because other graphs may have different inputs
Instead, define your graph inputs at the very beginning of your graph builder:
Stream<D> RunSomething(Stream<A> a, Stream<B> b, Stream<C> c, Graph& graph) {
// ...
}
CalculatorGraphConfig BuildGraph() {
Graph graph;
// Inputs.
Stream<A> a = graph.In(0).SetName("a").Cast<A>();
Stream<B> b = graph.In(1).SetName("b").Cast<B>();
Stream<C> c = graph.In(2).SetName("c").Cast<C>();
// 10/100/N lines of code.
Stream<D> d = RunSomething(a, b, c, graph);
// ...
return graph.GetConfig();
}
Use std::optional
if you have an input stream or side packet that is not
always defined and put it at the very beginning:
std::optional<Stream<A>> a;
if (needs_a) {
a = graph.In(0).SetName(a).Cast<A>();
}
Note: of course, there can be exceptions - for example, there can be a use case
where calling RunSomething1(..., graph)
, ..., RunSomethingN(..., graph)
is
intended to add new inputs, so afterwards you can iterate over them and feed
only added inputs into the graph. However, in any case, try to make it easy for
readers to find out what graph inputs it has or may have.
Define graph outputs at the very end
void RunSomething(Stream<Input> input, Graph& graph) {
// ...
node.Out("OUTPUT_F")
.SetName("output_f").ConnectTo(graph.Out(2)); // Bad.
}
CalculatorGraphConfig BuildGraph() {
Graph graph;
// 10/100/N lines of code.
node.Out("OUTPUT_D")
.SetName("output_d").ConnectTo(graph.Out(0)); // Bad.
// 10/100/N lines of code.
node.Out("OUTPUT_E")
.SetName("output_e").ConnectTo(graph.Out(1)); // Bad.
// 10/100/N lines of code.
RunSomething(input, graph);
// ...
return graph.GetConfig();
}
In the above code:
- It can be hard to guess how many outputs you have in the graph.
- Can be error prone overall and hard to maintain in future (e.g. is it a correct index? name? what if some outpus are removed or made optional? etc.).
RunSomething
reuse is limited as other graphs may have different outputs
Instead, define your graph outputs at the very end of your graph builder:
Stream<F> RunSomething(Stream<Input> input, Graph& graph) {
// ...
return node.Out("OUTPUT_F").Cast<F>();
}
CalculatorGraphConfig BuildGraph() {
Graph graph;
// 10/100/N lines of code.
Stream<D> d = node.Out("OUTPUT_D").Cast<D>();
// 10/100/N lines of code.
Stream<E> e = node.Out("OUTPUT_E").Cast<E>();
// 10/100/N lines of code.
Stream<F> f = RunSomething(input, graph);
// ...
// Outputs.
d.SetName("output_d").ConnectTo(graph.Out(0));
e.SetName("output_e").ConnectTo(graph.Out(1));
f.SetName("output_f").ConnectTo(graph.Out(2));
return graph.GetConfig();
}
Keep nodes decoupled from each other
In MediaPipe, packet streams and side packets are as meaningful as processing nodes. And any node input requirements and output products are expressed clearly and independently in terms of the streams and side packets it consumes and produces.
CalculatorGraphConfig BuildGraph() {
Graph graph;
// Inputs.
Stream<A> a = graph.In(0).Cast<A>();
auto& node1 = graph.AddNode("Calculator1");
a.ConnectTo(node1.In("INPUT"));
auto& node2 = graph.AddNode("Calculator2");
node1.Out("OUTPUT").ConnectTo(node2.In("INPUT")); // Bad.
auto& node3 = graph.AddNode("Calculator3");
node1.Out("OUTPUT").ConnectTo(node3.In("INPUT_B")); // Bad.
node2.Out("OUTPUT").ConnectTo(node3.In("INPUT_C")); // Bad.
auto& node4 = graph.AddNode("Calculator4");
node1.Out("OUTPUT").ConnectTo(node4.In("INPUT_B")); // Bad.
node2.Out("OUTPUT").ConnectTo(node4.In("INPUT_C")); // Bad.
node3.Out("OUTPUT").ConnectTo(node4.In("INPUT_D")); // Bad.
// Outputs.
node1.Out("OUTPUT").SetName("b").ConnectTo(graph.Out(0)); // Bad.
node2.Out("OUTPUT").SetName("c").ConnectTo(graph.Out(1)); // Bad.
node3.Out("OUTPUT").SetName("d").ConnectTo(graph.Out(2)); // Bad.
node4.Out("OUTPUT").SetName("e").ConnectTo(graph.Out(3)); // Bad.
return graph.GetConfig();
}
In the above code:
- Nodes are coupled to each other, e.g.
node4
knows where its inputs are coming from (node1
,node2
,node3
) and it complicates refactoring, maintenance and code reuse- Such usage pattern is a downgrade from proto representation, where nodes are decoupled by default.
node#.Out("OUTPUT")
calls are duplicated and readability suffers as you could use cleaner names instead and also provide an actual type.
So, to fix the above issues you can write the following graph construction code:
CalculatorGraphConfig BuildGraph() {
Graph graph;
// Inputs.
Stream<A> a = graph.In(0).Cast<A>();
// `node1` usage is limited to 3 lines below.
auto& node1 = graph.AddNode("Calculator1");
a.ConnectTo(node1.In("INPUT"));
Stream<B> b = node1.Out("OUTPUT").Cast<B>();
// `node2` usage is limited to 3 lines below.
auto& node2 = graph.AddNode("Calculator2");
b.ConnectTo(node2.In("INPUT"));
Stream<C> c = node2.Out("OUTPUT").Cast<C>();
// `node3` usage is limited to 4 lines below.
auto& node3 = graph.AddNode("Calculator3");
b.ConnectTo(node3.In("INPUT_B"));
c.ConnectTo(node3.In("INPUT_C"));
Stream<D> d = node3.Out("OUTPUT").Cast<D>();
// `node4` usage is limited to 5 lines below.
auto& node4 = graph.AddNode("Calculator4");
b.ConnectTo(node4.In("INPUT_B"));
c.ConnectTo(node4.In("INPUT_C"));
d.ConnectTo(node4.In("INPUT_D"));
Stream<E> e = node4.Out("OUTPUT").Cast<E>();
// Outputs.
b.SetName("b").ConnectTo(graph.Out(0));
c.SetName("c").ConnectTo(graph.Out(1));
d.SetName("d").ConnectTo(graph.Out(2));
e.SetName("e").ConnectTo(graph.Out(3));
return graph.GetConfig();
}
Now, if needed, you can easily remove node1
and make b
a graph input and no
updates are needed to node2
, node3
, node4
(same as in proto representation
by the way), because they are decoupled from each other.
Overall, the above code replicates the proto graph more closely:
input_stream: "a"
node {
calculator: "Calculator1"
input_stream: "INPUT:a"
output_stream: "OUTPUT:b"
}
node {
calculator: "Calculator2"
input_stream: "INPUT:b"
output_stream: "OUTPUT:C"
}
node {
calculator: "Calculator3"
input_stream: "INPUT_B:b"
input_stream: "INPUT_C:c"
output_stream: "OUTPUT:d"
}
node {
calculator: "Calculator4"
input_stream: "INPUT_B:b"
input_stream: "INPUT_C:c"
input_stream: "INPUT_D:d"
output_stream: "OUTPUT:e"
}
output_stream: "b"
output_stream: "c"
output_stream: "d"
output_stream: "e"
On top of that, now you can extract utility functions for further reuse in other graphs:
Stream<B> RunCalculator1(Stream<A> a, Graph& graph) {
auto& node = graph.AddNode("Calculator1");
a.ConnectTo(node.In("INPUT"));
return node.Out("OUTPUT").Cast<B>();
}
Stream<C> RunCalculator2(Stream<B> b, Graph& graph) {
auto& node = graph.AddNode("Calculator2");
b.ConnectTo(node.In("INPUT"));
return node.Out("OUTPUT").Cast<C>();
}
Stream<D> RunCalculator3(Stream<B> b, Stream<C> c, Graph& graph) {
auto& node = graph.AddNode("Calculator3");
b.ConnectTo(node.In("INPUT_B"));
c.ConnectTo(node.In("INPUT_C"));
return node.Out("OUTPUT").Cast<D>();
}
Stream<E> RunCalculator4(Stream<B> b, Stream<C> c, Stream<D> d, Graph& graph) {
auto& node = graph.AddNode("Calculator4");
b.ConnectTo(node.In("INPUT_B"));
c.ConnectTo(node.In("INPUT_C"));
d.ConnectTo(node.In("INPUT_D"));
return node.Out("OUTPUT").Cast<E>();
}
CalculatorGraphConfig BuildGraph() {
Graph graph;
// Inputs.
Stream<A> a = graph.In(0).Cast<A>();
Stream<B> b = RunCalculator1(a, graph);
Stream<C> c = RunCalculator2(b, graph);
Stream<D> d = RunCalculator3(b, c, graph);
Stream<E> e = RunCalculator4(b, c, d, graph);
// Outputs.
b.SetName("b").ConnectTo(graph.Out(0));
c.SetName("c").ConnectTo(graph.Out(1));
d.SetName("d").ConnectTo(graph.Out(2));
e.SetName("e").ConnectTo(graph.Out(3));
return graph.GetConfig();
}
Separate nodes for better readability
CalculatorGraphConfig BuildGraph() {
Graph graph;
// Inputs.
Stream<A> a = graph.In(0).Cast<A>();
auto& node1 = graph.AddNode("Calculator1");
a.ConnectTo(node1.In("INPUT"));
Stream<B> b = node1.Out("OUTPUT").Cast<B>();
auto& node2 = graph.AddNode("Calculator2");
b.ConnectTo(node2.In("INPUT"));
Stream<C> c = node2.Out("OUTPUT").Cast<C>();
auto& node3 = graph.AddNode("Calculator3");
b.ConnectTo(node3.In("INPUT_B"));
c.ConnectTo(node3.In("INPUT_C"));
Stream<D> d = node3.Out("OUTPUT").Cast<D>();
auto& node4 = graph.AddNode("Calculator4");
b.ConnectTo(node4.In("INPUT_B"));
c.ConnectTo(node4.In("INPUT_C"));
d.ConnectTo(node4.In("INPUT_D"));
Stream<E> e = node4.Out("OUTPUT").Cast<E>();
// Outputs.
b.SetName("b").ConnectTo(graph.Out(0));
c.SetName("c").ConnectTo(graph.Out(1));
d.SetName("d").ConnectTo(graph.Out(2));
e.SetName("e").ConnectTo(graph.Out(3));
return graph.GetConfig();
}
In the above code, it can be hard to grasp the idea where each node begins and ends. To improve this and help your code readers, you can simply have blank lines before and after each node:
CalculatorGraphConfig BuildGraph() {
Graph graph;
// Inputs.
Stream<A> a = graph.In(0).Cast<A>();
auto& node1 = graph.AddNode("Calculator1");
a.ConnectTo(node1.In("INPUT"));
Stream<B> b = node1.Out("OUTPUT").Cast<B>();
auto& node2 = graph.AddNode("Calculator2");
b.ConnectTo(node2.In("INPUT"));
Stream<C> c = node2.Out("OUTPUT").Cast<C>();
auto& node3 = graph.AddNode("Calculator3");
b.ConnectTo(node3.In("INPUT_B"));
c.ConnectTo(node3.In("INPUT_C"));
Stream<D> d = node3.Out("OUTPUT").Cast<D>();
auto& node4 = graph.AddNode("Calculator4");
b.ConnectTo(node4.In("INPUT_B"));
c.ConnectTo(node4.In("INPUT_C"));
d.ConnectTo(node4.In("INPUT_D"));
Stream<E> e = node4.Out("OUTPUT").Cast<E>();
// Outputs.
b.SetName("b").ConnectTo(graph.Out(0));
c.SetName("c").ConnectTo(graph.Out(1));
d.SetName("d").ConnectTo(graph.Out(2));
e.SetName("e").ConnectTo(graph.Out(3));
return graph.GetConfig();
}
Also, the above representation matches CalculatorGraphConfig
proto
representation better.
If you extract nodes into utility functions, they are scoped within functions already and it's clear where they begin and end, so it's completely fine to have:
CalculatorGraphConfig BuildGraph() {
Graph graph;
// Inputs.
Stream<A> a = graph.In(0).Cast<A>();
Stream<B> b = RunCalculator1(a, graph);
Stream<C> c = RunCalculator2(b, graph);
Stream<D> d = RunCalculator3(b, c, graph);
Stream<E> e = RunCalculator4(b, c, d, graph);
// Outputs.
b.SetName("b").ConnectTo(graph.Out(0));
c.SetName("c").ConnectTo(graph.Out(1));
d.SetName("d").ConnectTo(graph.Out(2));
e.SetName("e").ConnectTo(graph.Out(3));
return graph.GetConfig();
}