-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 23.2k
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
[ONNX] Improve lower tuples and handle control flow #57650
Conversation
💊 CI failures summary and remediationsAs of commit 22d1f74 (more details on the Dr. CI page):
🕵️ 1 new failure recognized by patternsThe following CI failures do not appear to be due to upstream breakages: pytorch_xla_linux_bionic_py3_6_clang9_build (1/1)Step: "Build" (full log | diagnosis details | 🔁 rerun)
|
Job | Step | Action |
---|---|---|
pytorch_python_doc_build | Chown workspace | 🔁 rerun |
This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI (expand for details).
Follow this link to opt-out of these comments for your Pull Requests.Please report bugs/suggestions to the (internal) Dr. CI Users group.
if (supported_ops.count(n->kind()) > 0) { | ||
if ((n->kind() == prim::Loop)) { | ||
if (input->node()->kind() == prim::TupleConstruct) { | ||
flattenTupleInBlockParam(n, i); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is this function only suitable for prim::Loop
? Then we may rename the function name to indicate that...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This can be used for any blocks with tuple inputs. Renamed it for now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good overall, some inline comments.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM!
e0dc9e3
to
94ef2b9
Compare
e0dc9e3
to
22d1f74
Compare
Improving the logic for finding tuple patterns within control flow. Also fixes: #56914 Co-authored-by: neginraoof <neginmr@utexas.edu> [ghstack-poisoned]
Improving the logic for finding tuple patterns within control flow. Also fixes: #56914 Co-authored-by: neginraoof <neginmr@utexas.edu>
Improving the logic for finding tuple patterns within control flow. Also fixes: #56914 Co-authored-by: neginraoof <neginmr@utexas.edu> [ghstack-poisoned]
Improving the logic for finding tuple patterns within control flow. Also fixes: #56914 Co-authored-by: neginraoof <neginmr@utexas.edu> [ghstack-poisoned]
Improving the logic for finding tuple patterns within control flow. Also fixes: #56914 Co-authored-by: neginraoof <neginmr@utexas.edu> Differential Revision: [D28714806](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D28714806) [ghstack-poisoned]
Summary: Pull Request resolved: #58694 Improving the logic for finding tuple patterns within control flow. Also fixes: #56914 Test Plan: Imported from OSS Reviewed By: driazati Differential Revision: D28714806 Pulled By: SplitInfinity fbshipit-source-id: 1552100cf9cc88e6f58df2e90758e8898ba0a9b3 Co-authored-by: neginraoof <neginmr@utexas.edu>
…ytorch#58694) Summary: Pull Request resolved: pytorch#58694 Improving the logic for finding tuple patterns within control flow. Also fixes: pytorch#56914 Test Plan: Imported from OSS Reviewed By: driazati Differential Revision: D28714806 Pulled By: SplitInfinity fbshipit-source-id: 1552100cf9cc88e6f58df2e90758e8898ba0a9b3 Co-authored-by: neginraoof <neginmr@utexas.edu>
Improving the logic for finding tuple patterns within control flow.
Also fixes: #56914