> I wonder whether this would make the torch fallback op
> ([apache/tvm#7401](https://github.com/apache/tvm/pull/7401)) more or less
> useful (it would depend on what you (plan to) do with unsupported ops). I am
> still pondering whether to close it or dust it off.
@t-vi It will help a lot. If
To clarify a bit, @tqchen and I are referring to a solution that we are still
using "global" as the storage scope, which is served as the property of the
storage, but add extra annotations (e.g. "sram") to further indicate the exact
place where the buffer is stored. This way, the system is able
Thanks @manupa-arm for the nice RFC! I left a few questions, and happy to
discuss more!
--
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/22#issuecomment-907921273
Thanks again for the contribution! I have no doubt that it is going to be
hugely important piece of work. Just made some suggestions in terms of wording.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/apa
