Hi all, I'm looking to do to the TensorRT BYOC integration what I just did for CUTLASS, namely make sure all compilation configuration is captured within a "tensorrt" Target instance rather than the current combination of PassContext and environment variables. This helps Collage, both because the overall configuration is just a list-of-Targets, and for some infrastructure issues internal to us in OctoML.
(I'll also switch TensoRT to be IRModule-at-a-time instead of function-at-a-time, however since TensorRT engines can only have one entry point this won't have any performance or sharing benefits, it will just be an internal engineering cleanup.) Just want to check if there are any existing users of the partition_for_tensorrt function and how sensitive I should be to maintaining backwards compatibility? Given we've broken large parts of the integration at various stages over the last few months I suspect this is not being actively used, but please give me a shout otherwise. Best, -m --- [Visit Topic](https://discuss.tvm.apache.org/t/byoc-how-backwards-compatible-does-the-tensorrt-partition-for-tensorrt-function-need-to-be/12957/1) to respond. You are receiving this because you enabled mailing list mode. To unsubscribe from these emails, [click here](https://discuss.tvm.apache.org/email/unsubscribe/6556af2624f96dca19535623fe9a8ac909c7996a148a1201e3ef97d32f270337).
