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

[WIP] Revert lower tvm builtin change #8643

Closed

Conversation

zhanghaohit
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@junrushao
Copy link
Member

I’m not actually an expert in vta or opencl. CC @tmoreau89 if you are interested :-)

@tmoreau89
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for the WIP PR, please let me know when it's ready for review @zhanghaohit - and also please provide a short summary of the PR in the description box, thanks!

@tmoreau89
Copy link
Contributor

@zhanghaohit looks like the CIs are green! Let me know when you'd like to change this PR to not WIP

@zhanghaohit
Copy link
Contributor Author

@zhanghaohit looks like the CIs are green! Let me know when you'd like to change this PR to not WIP

Hi @tmoreau89, this PR is actually the same as #8274 proposed by @mbrookhart . It is to show how to pass the CI if we want to revert the lower_tvm_builtin_change.

I think it is better to let @mbrookhart apply the changes to his PR #8274, which has already much discussion and context there.

I'll close this PR first, in order not to confuse.

@mbrookhart
Copy link
Contributor

Huh, I thought I did this, to the tutorial, but it doesn't seem to be in my PR! Oops! I'll do this there, thanks.

@mbrookhart
Copy link
Contributor

😳 Oops. Apparently I made this change locally and never pushed it upstream. Thank you for double checking me.

@mbrookhart
Copy link
Contributor

Also, sorry I missed this last week, I was out on PTO.

@tmoreau89
Copy link
Contributor

Ah no problem, my reaction times have been slow lately, I'm glad we're making forward progress.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants