Thanks for putting this out Andrew. Lots to unpack, but generally looks like a
good list.
On #6, I suspect a few of those stats could be gathered and reported prior to
shipping down to a device. (like mbed does for instance)
On #2, I wonder if perhaps something that runs daily against master
https://github.com/apache/incubator-tvm/pull/5826
---
[Visit Topic](https://discuss.tvm.ai/t/dynamic-ops-in-relay/6909/16) to respond.
You are receiving this because you enabled mailing list mode.
To unsubscribe from these emails, [click
here](https://discuss.tvm.ai/email/unsubscribe/5e76
@FrozenGene Can you please review when you get time?
--
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/incubator-tvm/pull/5754#issuecomment-644902827
Hi @manupa-arm,
Thanks for reading over the RFC!
BYO = bring your own; this would be akin to allowing developers to reimplement
vmalloc. This comment mostly reflects how the CRT is organized today, but some
changes may need to be made to the compilation process to make it easy to
replace the
Thanks for the RFC @areusch -- especially posting this ahead of the meetup. I
am trying to understand some bits around the subgoal of BYO memory allocator.
Would you be able to elaborate more on this ? (as to is this about allocating
tensors with memory blocks/regions/addresses ? If so are we
Actually, this can happen in the body of the function, but not here because the
inputs actually come from a function signature.
You can print `traced_module.code` to witness the translation (that is from
where I tracked down the function reproducing the non-processed names).
Another place where
@tqchen, @ziheng I saw that you both are the ones who have worked on
ReduceNode. Could you provide me with any inputs you have about this idea, and
whether I can go ahead and work on adding this option to the ReduceNode.
---
[Visit
Topic](https://discuss.tvm.ai/t/add-init-option-to-reduce
Unfortunately I think this will not help if you have two inputs called
`input.0` and `input.1` (this is allowed). These will get remapped to something
new like `input.X` and `input.Y` and it will be an assumption to work out which
is which.
Unless I am missing something?
---
[Visit
Topi
So far the PR only changes the default. Is there an example of the strict mode
that could be followed?
Also my changes for the PyTorch backend intertwined with the fixes to deal with
non-fp32 types in general (probably a property of my branch rather than a
necessity), and I would not want to r
