[Apache TVM Discuss] [Development/RFC] [RFC] Rename TVMContext to TVMDevice
Thanks for bringing this up! Context is indeed a bad name when it is used to indicate a certain device, because its meaning really varies depending on the “context”. In this case, “device” is certainly an acceptable name and is a lot better than “context”. Two thoughts: 1) when referring to a remote device in TVM RPC, what word should we use? Right now we still use ctx. 2) in dlpack, we still use DLContext, so are we going to propose a name change in dlpack as well? --- [Visit Topic](https://discuss.tvm.apache.org/t/rfc-rename-tvmcontext-to-tvmdevice/9090/2) 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/63bf342dc026bb1a93c9ac66814173b97bcbfb6d37c1341b6cda9426ac0f5262).
[Apache TVM Discuss] [Development/RFC] [RFC][BYOC] Android NNAPI Integration
@comaniac Great idea to only test for compilation success for large sub-graphs. I agree on this approach. :+1: For the clang++ part, it currently gets invoked in `tvm.contrib.ndk.create_shared`, which is passed as the `fcompile` to `lib.export_library()`. I guess it's good just as it is right now? The concern, if any, is that the arguments needs to be overrided with linkage to `libneuralnetworks.so` and tvm source/dependencies, which may be a bit unfamiliar for beginners. Should we create some kind of custom compilation function that passes these options for end users? --- [Visit Topic](https://discuss.tvm.apache.org/t/rfc-byoc-android-nnapi-integration/9072/6) 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/8b8d494da5f6a6a93a80166b91f3420327699709e3dba6a46080bdc94710da04).
[Apache TVM Discuss] [Development/RFC] PyTorch/LibTorch/TorchScript as a backend
Thank you for your comments! So there are two parts: - What do we represent in Relay, - what will be the function in the runtime. I guess I'm reading agreement here that TorchScript functions are a reasonably good fit for the runtime. If we determine this function during the (currently trivial) byoc phase, this would mean that we want to change the representation in relay to be at the op level (I guess). For this I need to do more figuring out how to best represent an arbitrary op in PyTorch, probably symbol (=name) and signature plus non-tensor inputs in attributes. Does the variable number of args handling in type inference look reasonable to you? --- [Visit Topic](https://discuss.tvm.apache.org/t/pytorch-libtorch-torchscript-as-a-backend/9043/9) 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/fc51b77e260709fcbcbf060c736f745c6abc3c4c008cad5b439e29b1b348ee50).
[Apache TVM Discuss] [Development/RFC] [RFC] Search-based Automated Quantization
Thanks! :coffee: :coffee: --- [Visit Topic](https://discuss.tvm.apache.org/t/rfc-search-based-automated-quantization/5483/22) 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/22e826797e3d0b607c2c431e2b16a19a064866646f7dc9de8c55c97c95cabc03).
[Apache TVM Discuss] [Development/RFC] [RFC] Rename TVMContext to TVMDevice
1. TVM uses [RPCSession](https://tvm.apache.org/docs/api/python/rpc.html#tvm.rpc.RPCSession.context) to create a remote context/device. We can also change this API to `device`. 2. In fact, I also plan to create a RFC to dlpack for the context name change. --- [Visit Topic](https://discuss.tvm.apache.org/t/rfc-rename-tvmcontext-to-tvmdevice/9090/3) 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/a78b4b3277dd2b472900ff88acd55d880252e6795c0e9bc89f20395748b3d5e7).
