Re: [apache/tvm] [Release] v0.8 Release Planning (#8976)

[Christopher Sidebottom]

@junrushao1994 does this mean that 0.8 will go out with half finished 
implementations for things, such as library integrations (i.e. CMSIS-NN) and 
tvmc arguments (tvmc is not yet stable as there's breaking changes incoming)? 
If the process is just to take `main` and tag it, can we rapidly move to 
focusing on a 0.9 release with a list of issues as suggested by @areusch so we 
can work towards stability in a 1.x release. 

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/apache/tvm/issues/8976#issuecomment-954666316

Re: [apache/tvm-rfcs] [RFC][TVMC] Add support for micro targets (PR #43)

[Gustavo Romero]

@mehrdadh thanks for the review!

Yes, if a Project API method implementation is absent a `TypeError` will be 
raised at the server side because the abstract method is not implemented when 
the Handler class is derived. Also as per 
https://github.com/apache/tvm-rfcs/blame/main/rfcs/0008-microtvm-project-api.md#L363
 I understand the implementation for all of the methods are indeed mandatory.

Thus, just as a reference something similar to the following will happen:

```
gromero@amd:~/git/tvm$ tvmc micro create-project --force /tmp/x46 
~/scripts/sine.tar zephyr --project-option zephyr_board=stm32f746g_disco 
project_type=host_driven 
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File 
"/home/gromero/git/tvm/apps/microtvm/zephyr/template_project/microtvm_api_server.py",
 line 739, in 
server.main(Handler())
TypeError: Can't instantiate abstract class Handler with abstract method build
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/lib/python3.9/runpy.py", line 197, in _run_module_as_main
return _run_code(code, main_globals, None,
  File "/usr/lib/python3.9/runpy.py", line 87, in _run_code
exec(code, run_globals)
  File "/home/gromero/git/tvm/python/tvm/driver/tvmc/__main__.py", line 24, in 

tvmc.main.main()
  File "/home/gromero/git/tvm/python/tvm/driver/tvmc/main.py", line 94, in main
sys.exit(_main(sys.argv[1:]))
  File "/home/gromero/git/tvm/python/tvm/driver/tvmc/main.py", line 69, in _main
make_subparser(subparser, parser)
  File "/home/gromero/git/tvm/python/tvm/driver/tvmc/micro.py", line 173, in 
add_micro_parser
template = project.TemplateProject.from_directory(template_dir)
  File "/home/gromero/git/tvm/python/tvm/micro/project.py", line 110, in 
from_directory
return cls(client.instantiate_from_dir(template_project_dir))
  File "/home/gromero/git/tvm/python/tvm/micro/project.py", line 114, in 
__init__
self._info = self._api_client.server_info_query(__version__)
  File "/home/gromero/git/tvm/python/tvm/micro/project_api/client.py", line 
143, in server_info_query
reply = self._request_reply("server_info_query", {"tvm_version": 
tvm_version})
  File "/home/gromero/git/tvm/python/tvm/micro/project_api/client.py", line 
119, in _request_reply
raise ConnectionShutdownError("got EOF reading reply from API server")
tvm.micro.project_api.client.ConnectionShutdownError: got EOF reading reply 
from API server
```


-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/apache/tvm-rfcs/pull/43#issuecomment-955016008

Re: [apache/tvm-rfcs] [RFC] Unified device/target/memory scope planning (#38)

[Cody Yu]

For the proposed BYOC flow (i.e., 
`MergeAndAnnotate`/`AnnotateSEScopes`/`PlanDevices`/`PartitionBySEScope`), it 
doesn't clear to me that whether the developer programming model will change or 
not. Specifically, could we still use the current approaches (i.e., op-based 
annotation and pattern-based annotation)? Also how the approach that has a 
custom Relay pass to annotate `compiler_begin`/`compiler_end` would change? 
Thanks.


-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/apache/tvm-rfcs/pull/38#issuecomment-955085747

Re: [apache/tvm-rfcs] [RFC][TIR] Layout transformations on buffer access (#39)

[Wuwei Lin]

I'd suggest adding the `BufferTransform` data structure here which will be very 
helpful to other audience.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/apache/tvm-rfcs/pull/39#issuecomment-955098088

Re: [apache/tvm] [Release] v0.8 Release Planning (#8976)

[Jason]

Hi, @junrushao1994
I think we could add paddlepaddle frontend as a new feature in the release note 
of v0.8

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/apache/tvm/issues/8976#issuecomment-955121366