Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[REFACTOR] PassContext.fallback_device -> PassConfig.config #5650

Closed
tqchen opened this issue May 22, 2020 · 7 comments
Closed

[REFACTOR] PassContext.fallback_device -> PassConfig.config #5650

tqchen opened this issue May 22, 2020 · 7 comments
Assignees

Comments

@tqchen
Copy link
Member

tqchen commented May 22, 2020

#5631 Introduces a generic config mechanism to store the pass configuration options. Given that fallback_device is a pas related config, We should probably also migrate PassContext->fallback_device to a special config. e.g. relay.fallback_device_type with IntImmNode as its node type

@tqchen
Copy link
Member Author

tqchen commented May 22, 2020

cc @zhiics @comaniac

@zhiics
Copy link
Member

zhiics commented May 22, 2020

@tqchen Thanks for reminding. I will take a stab next week.

@zhiics
Copy link
Member

zhiics commented May 28, 2020

I realize we may also want to remove relay.build_config and directly use PassContext to keep it consistent to tir, but it may invoke a lot of changes. @tqchen thoughts?

@tqchen
Copy link
Member Author

tqchen commented May 28, 2020

I agree we should do that as well

@zhiics
Copy link
Member

zhiics commented May 29, 2020

One potential problem is that it may break downstream deployment.

@tqchen
Copy link
Member Author

tqchen commented May 29, 2020

We could mark build_config as deprecation, and remove that API in the next release cycle. In the meanwhile, we should replace all of the current usages.

@zhiics
Copy link
Member

zhiics commented May 29, 2020

Sounds like a good plan.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants