-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.5k
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
[MetaSchedule][Refactor] Clarify Integration Logic #10927
[MetaSchedule][Refactor] Clarify Integration Logic #10927
Conversation
58e5af3
to
ceb2bc2
Compare
ceb2bc2
to
ab67e5f
Compare
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! :)
Overall, LGTM. |
@sunggg Thanks for asking! There is no breaking change in terms of API usage, given ApplyHistoryBest is the only framework-facing integration point. It's still used in the same way like: with ApplyHistoryBest(database=...):
...
|
@sunggg For now, |
@junrushao1994 Thank you for the explanation. Makes sense to me. |
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, thanks for the refactor!
Based on @masahi's PR #10578, we are able to further simplify the logic and remove redundancy.
Changes:
MetaScheduleContext
, which is not useful any more after Masa's new relay backend;ApplyHistoryBest
, and slightly improve the error message;integration.py
into 3 files:apply_history_best.py
,extracted_task.py
andrelay_integration.py
;These changes make future Relax integration easier - the only thing needed is to add
relax_integration.py
without having to worry about potential conflicts.