Re: [apache/tvm-rfcs] [RFC] Create LLVM scope class for use with LLVM libraries (PR #83)

2022-07-08 Thread Krzysztof Parzyszek
> Just to followup, why does ParseIR require activation of a scope, or is it > possible that ParseIR returns a tuple of Target and Module, where activation > is done separately. The reason is that `ParseIR` needs to make calls to LLVM functions to create the `llvm::Module`. -- Reply to this

Re: [apache/tvm-rfcs] [RFC] Create LLVM scope class for use with LLVM libraries (PR #83)

2022-07-08 Thread Tianqi Chen
Just to followup, why does ParseIR require activation of a scope, or is it possible that ParseIR returns a tuple of Target and Module, where activation is done separately. I am asking this mainly to see if we can get an explicit With style API -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitH

Re: [apache/tvm-rfcs] [RFC] Create LLVM scope class for use with LLVM libraries (PR #83)

2022-07-08 Thread Krzysztof Parzyszek
To address the second question: we shouldn't allow nesting of LLVM scopes. The reason is that if the target doesn't specify any command line flags, the assumption is that it will rely on LLVM's defaults. If we were to nest scopes, and the outer scope did modify flags, then the inner scope (wit

Re: [apache/tvm-rfcs] [RFC] Create LLVM scope class for use with LLVM libraries (PR #83)

2022-07-08 Thread Krzysztof Parzyszek
Both `LoadIR` or `ParseIR` take an optional pre-existing `LLVMContext`, and return a pair `{llvm::Module, LLVMScope}`, where the scope object in the pair is newly constructed, and contains the given `LLVMContext` (or create a new one if none was given). In the first call to `ParseIR`, the calle

Re: [apache/tvm] [ci][docker] Use RFC image tags only (PR #11938)

2022-07-08 Thread github-actions[bot]
It has been a while since this PR was updated, @Mousius @areusch please leave a review or address the outstanding comments. @driazati if this PR is still a work in progress, please [convert it to a draft](https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/proposing-changes

Re: [apache/tvm-rfcs] [RFC] Name mangling in IRModules (PR #84)

2022-07-08 Thread Tianqi Chen
> Regarding the name_hint being a final name. I am too of this opinion (it > should be a final name) and believe that it already works this way. If I am > not wrong, the only edge case is where we use the global_symbol attribute > instead. We should define "final name". In this context, it is

Re: [apache/tvm-rfcs] [RFC] Create LLVM scope class for use with LLVM libraries (PR #83)

2022-07-08 Thread Tianqi Chen
Thanks @kparzysz-quic . Sorry for the delayed reply since we are taking break here. Overall I like the direction we are going. Just to figure out the spectrum of possible APIs My main question is how are we going to interact with multiple ParseIR calls. Some example would be helpful. For examp