Skip to content

[quant][graphmode][refactor] getGeneralTensorInputs(Node*) -> getPassThroughInputs(Value*)#35558

Closed
jerryzh168 wants to merge 12 commits intogh/jerryzh168/277/basefrom
gh/jerryzh168/277/head
Closed

[quant][graphmode][refactor] getGeneralTensorInputs(Node*) -> getPassThroughInputs(Value*)#35558
jerryzh168 wants to merge 12 commits intogh/jerryzh168/277/basefrom
gh/jerryzh168/277/head

Conversation

@jerryzh168
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@jerryzh168 jerryzh168 commented Mar 27, 2020

Stack from ghstack:

Summary:
This is to have a more fine grained support for general ops,
e.g. for sort, the first output will have pass through inputs and the second op does not need to be quantized
so we'll have a check for that

Test Plan:
.

Reviewers:
.

Subscribers:

Tasks:

Tags:

Differential Revision: D20752128

…ThroughInputs(Value*)

Summary:
This is to have a more fined grained support for general ops,
e.g. for sort, the first output will have pass through inputs and the second op does not need to be quantized
so we'll have a check for that

Test Plan:
.

Reviewers:
.

Subscribers:

Tasks:

Tags:

[ghstack-poisoned]
@jerryzh168 jerryzh168 requested a review from apaszke as a code owner March 27, 2020 18:59
@facebook-github-bot facebook-github-bot added the oncall: jit Add this issue/PR to JIT oncall triage queue label Mar 27, 2020
@dr-ci
Copy link
Copy Markdown

dr-ci Bot commented Mar 27, 2020

💊 CircleCI build failures summary and remediations

As of commit d496f42 (more details on the Dr. CI page):


None of the build failures appear to be your fault 💚


  • 1/4 tentatively recognized as flaky ❄️

  • 3/4 broken upstream at merge base 5e27de0 since Mar 30

    Please rebase on the viable/strict branch (expand for instructions)

    If your commit is newer than viable/strict, you can try basing on an older, stable commit:

    git fetch https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch viable/strict
    git rebase --onto FETCH_HEAD $(git merge-base origin/master HEAD)
    

    If your commit is older than viable/strict:

    git fetch https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch viable/strict
    git rebase FETCH_HEAD
    

    Check out the recency history of this "viable master" tracking branch.


❄️ 1 tentatively flaky failure

1 failure tentatively classified as flaky but have not triggered reruns to confirm:

See CircleCI build pytorch_linux_xenial_cuda10_2_cudnn7_py3_ge_config_legacy_test (1/1)

Step: "Set Up System Environment" (full log | pattern match details) ❄️

gpg: no valid OpenPGP data found.
+ curl --retry 3 -s -L https://packagecloud.io/circleci/trusty/gpgkey 
+ sudo apt-key add - 
gpg: no valid OpenPGP data found. 

🚧 3 upstream failures:

These were probably caused by upstream breakages:


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 on the GitHub issue tracker.

See how this bot performed.

This comment has been revised 71 times.

… -> getPassThroughInputs(Value*)"

Summary:
This is to have a more fined grained support for general ops,
e.g. for sort, the first output will have pass through inputs and the second op does not need to be quantized
so we'll have a check for that

Test Plan:
.

Reviewers:
.

Subscribers:

Tasks:

Tags:

[ghstack-poisoned]
… -> getPassThroughInputs(Value*)"

Summary:
This is to have a more fined grained support for general ops,
e.g. for sort, the first output will have pass through inputs and the second op does not need to be quantized
so we'll have a check for that

Test Plan:
.

Reviewers:
.

Subscribers:

Tasks:

Tags:

[ghstack-poisoned]
… -> getPassThroughInputs(Value*)"

Summary:
This is to have a more fined grained support for general ops,
e.g. for sort, the first output will have pass through inputs and the second op does not need to be quantized
so we'll have a check for that

Test Plan:
.

Reviewers:
.

Subscribers:

Tasks:

Tags:

[ghstack-poisoned]
… -> getPassThroughInputs(Value*)"

Summary:
This is to have a more fined grained support for general ops,
e.g. for sort, the first output will have pass through inputs and the second op does not need to be quantized
so we'll have a check for that

Test Plan:
.

Reviewers:
.

Subscribers:

Tasks:

Tags:

[ghstack-poisoned]
… -> getPassThroughInputs(Value*)"

Summary:
This is to have a more fined grained support for general ops,
e.g. for sort, the first output will have pass through inputs and the second op does not need to be quantized
so we'll have a check for that

Test Plan:
.

Reviewers:
.

Subscribers:

Tasks:

Tags:

[ghstack-poisoned]
… -> getPassThroughInputs(Value*)"

Summary:
This is to have a more fined grained support for general ops,
e.g. for sort, the first output will have pass through inputs and the second op does not need to be quantized
so we'll have a check for that

Test Plan:
.

Reviewers:
.

Subscribers:

Tasks:

Tags:

[ghstack-poisoned]
… -> getPassThroughInputs(Value*)"

Summary:
This is to have a more fined grained support for general ops,
e.g. for sort, the first output will have pass through inputs and the second op does not need to be quantized
so we'll have a check for that

Test Plan:
.

Reviewers:
.

Subscribers:

Tasks:

Tags:

[ghstack-poisoned]
… -> getPassThroughInputs(Value*)"

Summary:
This is to have a more fined grained support for general ops,
e.g. for sort, the first output will have pass through inputs and the second op does not need to be quantized
so we'll have a check for that

Test Plan:
.

Reviewers:
.

Subscribers:

Tasks:

Tags:

[ghstack-poisoned]
… -> getPassThroughInputs(Value*)"

Summary:
This is to have a more fined grained support for general ops,
e.g. for sort, the first output will have pass through inputs and the second op does not need to be quantized
so we'll have a check for that

Test Plan:
.

Reviewers:
.

Subscribers:

Tasks:

Tags:

[ghstack-poisoned]
… -> getPassThroughInputs(Value*)"

Summary:
This is to have a more fined grained support for general ops,
e.g. for sort, the first output will have pass through inputs and the second op does not need to be quantized
so we'll have a check for that

Test Plan:
.

Reviewers:
.

Subscribers:

Tasks:

Tags:

[ghstack-poisoned]
… -> getPassThroughInputs(Value*)"

Summary:
This is to have a more fined grained support for general ops,
e.g. for sort, the first output will have pass through inputs and the second op does not need to be quantized
so we'll have a check for that

Test Plan:
.

Reviewers:
.

Subscribers:

Tasks:

Tags:

[ghstack-poisoned]
@facebook-github-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

This pull request has been merged in 9018538.

@facebook-github-bot facebook-github-bot deleted the gh/jerryzh168/277/head branch April 3, 2020 14:18
laurentdupin pushed a commit to laurentdupin/pytorch that referenced this pull request Apr 24, 2026
…ThroughInputs(Value*) (pytorch#35558)

Summary:
Pull Request resolved: pytorch#35558

This is to have a more fine grained support for general ops,
e.g. for sort, the first output will have pass through inputs and the second op does not need to be quantized
so we'll have a check for that

Test Plan:
.

Imported from OSS

Differential Revision: D20752128

fbshipit-source-id: 825c4c393910a88ecb12e24e9a2f3b05c5d5a7ab
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Merged oncall: jit Add this issue/PR to JIT oncall triage queue

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants