Re: [dmlc/tvm] [RFC][AutoTVM] Selective Tuning (#4188)

2019-10-25 Thread Tianqi Chen
If we make the code modular enough via high level scheduling(planning api), the networkx dep could be an optional once for those who want to use the component, which might help alleviate the issue -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly

Re: [dmlc/tvm] [VOTE] Add "Organizations contributing using and contributing to TVM" Section to Community Webpage (#4162)

2019-10-25 Thread Yuwei Hu
+1 -- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/dmlc/tvm/issues/4162#issuecomment-546451181

Re: [dmlc/tvm] [RFC][AutoTVM] Selective Tuning (#4188)

2019-10-25 Thread Cody Hao Yu
@tqchen Thanks for the comments and you're right. One important message behind this investigation is a schedule should be shared across ops with differernt attributes. For the networkx dependency, I have the same concern as well. I used it to build a graph and find maximum cliques in the graph.

Re: [dmlc/tvm] [RFC][AutoTVM] Selective Tuning (#4188)

2019-10-25 Thread Tianqi Chen
Thanks for the proposal. I think overall this can be categorized into schedule of the tasks. Also vc @eqy Would be nice if we can come up with abstractions for a generic task schedule strategy, then add it as a modular plugin. The networkx dependency is something that worth discussing. Ideally w