Yes, this part had been a pain point in figuring out which part of the
compilation pipeline is being run.
Regarding, the *lower*, I think C++ version is not run (maybe not anywhere in
the tvm compilation -- correct me if I am wrong) at the minute because there is
a check for the registered p
I've been looking into the TVM lower/build pipeline recently and have
encountered an unusual duplication around the 'driver'. In particular, we have
two files
`src/driver/driver_api.cc` and `python/tvm/driver/build_module.py` which both
seem to independently define almost identical functionali
One issue in old schedule ops is we can not get the accurate bouds with
inferbound, what will it be like in new schedule system? thanks.
---
[Visit
Topic](https://discuss.tvm.apache.org/t/rfc-tensorir-a-schedulable-ir-for-tvm/7872/64)
to respond.
You are receiving this because you enable
Maybe let me make my question clearer?
I am working on some cross-compilation work and the kernel is gonna be
integrated to a C/C++ project.
An ideal interface that generates the kernel for me should be a pair of (.o,
.h).
Even more aggressively, I want a pair of (.ll, .h) since I want to ru
