[Quant][PT2E][X86] Enable annotation of aten.mul.tensor with X86InductorQuantizer#150831
[Quant][PT2E][X86] Enable annotation of aten.mul.tensor with X86InductorQuantizer#150831Xia-Weiwen wants to merge 5 commits into
Conversation
🔗 Helpful Links🧪 See artifacts and rendered test results at hud.pytorch.org/pr/150831
Note: Links to docs will display an error until the docs builds have been completed. ✅ You can merge normally! (1 Unrelated Failure)As of commit 71e079b with merge base 01f226b ( UNSTABLE - The following job is marked as unstable, possibly due to flakiness on trunk:
This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI and updates every 15 minutes. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.
Comments suppressed due to low confidence (1)
test/quantization/pt2e/test_x86inductor_quantizer.py:2877
- [nitpick] Avoid using 'type' as a variable name because it shadows the built-in function. Consider renaming it to 'model_type' or a similar descriptive name.
for type in [0, 1, 2]:
leslie-fang-intel
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM. A small comment.
|
Hi @jerryzh168 Could you please review this PR? Thanks. |
| else: | ||
| return x * y.sum().item() | ||
|
|
||
| for type in [0, 1, 2, 3]: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: I think we can improve [0, 1, 2, 3] by defining different classes for each test case here
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks. Updated.
|
Close this PR as we need to move to Torchao. |
Stack from ghstack (oldest at bottom):
Summary
This PR adds support of annotation of
aten.mul.tensorinX86InductorQuantizer.mulis not annotated by default. Users need to set the following to enable annotation ofmul:After
convert_pt2e, users get patterns likeTest plan
cc @jgong5 @mingfeima @XiaobingSuper @sanchitintel @ashokei @jingxu10