Yes, I'd very much support a patch to get you going again. I'm confused as to
why just setting the virtual_device_ in the visitor directly does not work, so
option a is you send me a unit test and I dig into that. Option b is your
patch, however since you've needed to bounce back to c++ perhap
Hi Rafael, virtual device handling is unfortunately in a halfway-implemented
state, and it's been on my backlog for a while to wrap that up. Sorry about
that! I'm hoping I can work on it in a few weeks as a break between other tasks.
There's a few things to be done:
- Populate the virtual_dev
Name supplies usually have both a cache lookup:
```
name_supply.UniqueGlobalFor("__main__")
```
and a hinted fresh name generator:
```
name_supply.FreshGlobalWithPrefix("my_module", "my_var", "any_other_prefix")
```
---
[Visit
Topic](https://discuss.tvm.apache.org/t/pre-rfc-name-mangling-i
Other than the plumbing, is there an issue with threading a name supply so that
globals have a unique and appropriately hinted name at birth? It's not too hard
to support name supply splitting such that names can be drawn from independent
supplies without collision. It is also possible to refi
Hi all, the next revision of the RFC is up, incorporating comments from the
first round of reviews.
---
[Visit
Topic](https://discuss.tvm.apache.org/t/collage-rfc-ready-for-comments/12308/2)
to respond.
You are receiving this because you enabled mailing list mode.
To unsubscribe from th
Hi folks, I've just put up a PR describing our plans for 'Collage' here at
OctoML:
https://github.com/apache/tvm-rfcs/pull/62
This work is derived from the preprint:
> *Collage: Automated Integration of Deep Learning Backends*
> Byungsoo Jeon, Sunghyun Park, Peiyuan Liao, Sheng Xu, Tianqi Che
Agree with your last sentence -- FoldConstants should be CPU only and not carry
forward any target-specific flags. (Ideally do all that more directly instead
of piggy-backing on the interpreter, but that's a bigger issue.)
---
[Visit
Topic](https://discuss.tvm.apache.org/t/problem-with-fu
Hi Michael, thanks for the proposal! Like others I'm very supportive of
tightening up the BYOC interfaces.
My group here at OctoML have been looking at bringing a backend placement
search capability to TVM, a la the 'Collage' paper
(https://arxiv.org/pdf/2111.00655.pdf). Under that approach t
Hi @wrongtest, thanks for the nice write up.
> Currently, we have to hack the compile engine to find the pre-scheduled
> PrimFunc from a standalone cache, we are glad to know what is the best way to
> achieve this goal.
Here's some thoughts, please correct any misunderstandings I might have.
Thumbs up from me, I'd like to see this proceed to PRs.
- Agree with adding config as a first-class field to IRModule.
- The build API backwards compat should be straightforward by extension of the
existing `if isinstance` checks. We can emit deprecation warnings for a release
or two.
- I thin
Can I try an example? Again, this is all motivated by working in the device
planning code so my pov may be skewed.
Let's say we've implemented the above and we have three target labels and their
associated definitions:
```
cpu: llvm ...
gpu1: ... device_id=0
gpu2: ... device_id=1
```
Coming late to the party here. As it happens I'm working on trying to separate
device planning from memory planning as part of the 'unified lowering' effort.
I've noticed 'device' in this setting means 'DLDeviceType' or the
default/invalid '0' type. A few parts of the code use DLDevice, thus
12 matches
Mail list logo
