@areusch - Thanks for replying.
Please see my comments below regarding your questions.
1. Question: device planning, which I think maybe you're doing outside the
typical TVM flow?
* If I understand your question correctly: Yes and no.
* We are using TVM relay flow to generate JSON meta files and IR
sub-graphs of the network model
* We like to use TVM code-gen and runtime flow to generate binary to run
inference for “llvm-part” of the network model
* But we also like to use our build-from-outside-TVM-flow, Marvell
accelerator backend/code-gen component to generate binary for “Marvell-part” of
the network model (to be run on Marvell accelerator)
i. Not
right now, but in a future RFC, we can and like to provide APIs and library
files so that we can embed Marvell backend/code-gen component into libtvm.so
and within the typical TVM flow
* Not right now, but in a future RFC, when Marvell driver APIs and
TVM-Marvell runtime & driver hookups are ready, we like to use the typical TVM
flow (with Marvell modifications) to run “Marvell-part” computes of the network
on Marvell HW accelerator directly and llvm-part of computes
1. Question: executor, which I think you may have re-implemented here.
* I believe that we implemented specializations of the current executor
code in order to generate Marvell JSON meta files.
* It is possible that others may have also implemented “parts of”
similar specializations in the last 6 months – if this is the case (and we can
use them), we like to know how we can merge codebase
2. Question: to provide code links into your PoC if that would help me
understand--I can do some targeted reading
* As listed in the RFC, our POC changes have been up-streamed to the TVM
GitHub’s PR-9730.
If you like to, you should also be able to git clone from
https://github.com/ccjoechou/tvm.git and checkout & use the “byoc-mrvl” branch.
3. Question: it would also be great to spell out a plan for tests here--it
seems like it might be possible to checkin your compiler/simulator into our CI,
but could you be more explicit about your plans there?
* We have added infrastructure code and a test_mrvl suite to run the POC
TVM-BYOC-Marvell flow
* Currently, there is a code-gen test, which can be run to use a
pre-trained a ssd-resnet50 model - please see
tvm/tests/python/contrib/test_mrvl/ test_mrvl_codegen.py and its
test_ssd_resnet50_aot_json_codegen function
* Should also be able to run regular docker steps below to exercise the
BYOC-Marvell flow to compile a ssd-resnet50 network to generate JSON meta files
for Marvell accelerator:
* ./docker/bash.sh --name tvm_mrvl tlcpack/ci-cpu:v0.79
./tests/scripts/task_config_build_cpu.sh
* ./docker/bash.sh --name tvm_mrvl tlcpack/ci-cpu:v0.79
./tests/scripts/task_build.sh build -j10
* ./docker/bash.sh --name tvm_mrvl tlcpack/ci-cpu:v0.79
./tests/scripts/task_ci_setup.sh
* ./docker/bash.sh --name tvm_mrvl tlcpack/ci-cpu:v0.79
./tests/scripts/task_python_integration.sh
* For the last task_python_integration.sh suite, can edit the file in
order to skip steps to run other test suites but focus on running only
tests/python/contrib/test_mrvl:
sudo pip3 install gluoncv
run_pytest ctypes ${TVM_INTEGRATION_TESTSUITE_NAME}-contrib
tests/python/contrib/test_mrvl
Pleas also see my comments in-line below.
Let me raise a difference here:
* The TVM partition’s sub-graph seems to represent a relay function, which
can include multiple frontend operators captured by utilizing the relay
merge-composite patten
* The Marvell sub-graph is a connected graph of multiple relay
merge-composite functions – I did not know how to include a Figure in the RFC
file before (now I do). But if you look at the listed pre-RFC link, we did
include figures at end of the corresponding pre-RFC on the discuss forum –
please check the end of pre-RFC and its figure to see whether they can help
explaining the definition of Marvell sub-graphs here.
https://discuss.tvm.apache.org/t/pre-rfc-byoc-marvell-ml-ai-accelerator-integration/11691].
Thanks again and please let us know, if you like to discuss more.
* Joe
From: Andrew Reusch ***@***.***>
Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2022 12:48 PM
To: apache/tvm-rfcs ***@***.***>
Cc: Joe Chou ***@***.***>; Mention ***@***.***>
Subject: [EXT] Re: [apache/tvm-rfcs] [RFC][BYOC] Marvell ML/AI Accelerator
Integration (PR #48)
External Email
________________________________
@areusch requested changes on this pull request.
@ssdurako<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_ssdurako&d=DwMFaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=84zI-iH2xz28Q_xujSGbjYaq38CgcRgl_vGzCtF6TwQ&m=VNqzldKdQt96drtn_9Nfv7pyo4q1twvxtd6wMIR7FYI4cpvEKxaaVtBsanbms18J&s=d2Phi5OhJYC30chQlDSTXGdBUHLcKOytTeAstHx3XVU&e=>
@ccjoechou<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_ccjoechou&d=DwMFaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=84zI-iH2xz28Q_xujSGbjYaq38CgcRgl_vGzCtF6TwQ&m=VNqzldKdQt96drtn_9Nfv7pyo4q1twvxtd6wMIR7FYI4cpvEKxaaVtBsanbms18J&s=WZdEJI-EoLFqhJJcO9YZeCcSYSSC-s48_LgSB5F5K1c&e=>
apologies for the long delay! i think we missed this one since it was mailed
during TVMCon and also just before we all took off for the holidays. I'll try
to be a bit better about reviewing this.
Overall I have some understanding of your approach with this RFC. I'd like to
further discuss some of the rationale behind:
* device planning, which I think maybe you're doing outside the typical TVM
flow?
* executor, which I think you may have re-implemented here.
I'm a bit low on bandwidth to read your full PoC PR. would you mind clarifying
the RFC as a starting point (or feel free to provide code links into your PoC
if that would help me understand--I can do some targeted reading, I'm just
fairly busy for a full read-through right now)
it would also be great to spell out a plan for tests here--it seems like it
might be possible to checkin your compiler/simulator into our CI, but could you
be more explicit about your plans there?
also cc
@comaniac<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_comaniac&d=DwMFaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=84zI-iH2xz28Q_xujSGbjYaq38CgcRgl_vGzCtF6TwQ&m=VNqzldKdQt96drtn_9Nfv7pyo4q1twvxtd6wMIR7FYI4cpvEKxaaVtBsanbms18J&s=5likf9V3g5a6XmvwPAr-ais9kJ9tL1Oe3UCcdIReMIQ&e=>
@mbs-octoml<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_mbs-2Doctoml&d=DwMFaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=84zI-iH2xz28Q_xujSGbjYaq38CgcRgl_vGzCtF6TwQ&m=VNqzldKdQt96drtn_9Nfv7pyo4q1twvxtd6wMIR7FYI4cpvEKxaaVtBsanbms18J&s=e3YsFOFCwaZu1YZYwMB9BPZ3m6b0Ne-2byTRo1cYgvQ&e=>
@Mousius<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_Mousius&d=DwMFaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=84zI-iH2xz28Q_xujSGbjYaq38CgcRgl_vGzCtF6TwQ&m=VNqzldKdQt96drtn_9Nfv7pyo4q1twvxtd6wMIR7FYI4cpvEKxaaVtBsanbms18J&s=mqoZGl7ZzAvBheq3qBAww4oxaItbLwRtTPxO_jkI7w4&e=>
@junrushao1994<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_junrushao1994&d=DwMFaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=84zI-iH2xz28Q_xujSGbjYaq38CgcRgl_vGzCtF6TwQ&m=VNqzldKdQt96drtn_9Nfv7pyo4q1twvxtd6wMIR7FYI4cpvEKxaaVtBsanbms18J&s=MuKxC3uDBMZAx2b6eewBCqm_vk3zVN29bCKxGNYf8a0&e=>
for further comments on BYOC, device planning, and support for custom executors
________________________________
In
rfcs/0048-BYOC-Marvell-ML-accelerator-integration.md<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_apache_tvm-2Drfcs_pull_48-23discussion-5Fr787106344&d=DwMFaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=84zI-iH2xz28Q_xujSGbjYaq38CgcRgl_vGzCtF6TwQ&m=VNqzldKdQt96drtn_9Nfv7pyo4q1twvxtd6wMIR7FYI4cpvEKxaaVtBsanbms18J&s=R7fm2C2KsgY7__XRfP-OLUzHCTDIV2vV74gcKzdXtns&e=>:
> + conv2d + add + batch_norm + tuple.getitem(0) + relu
+ * For the first Marvell-BYOC revision, at most one for-accelerator Mrvl
subgraph and at most one for-TVM-target
+ non-Mrvl subgraph (let's call this sub-graph B) can be identified; plus,
the for-accelerator Mrvl subgraph can
+ only use input tensor(s) of given pre-trained network as its subgraph’s
input tensors
+
+* Do code-gen step for each for-accelerator Mrvl subgraph:
+ * Marvell-BYOC-specific attributes are introduced for each
composite-merged/fused Call node so that a Nodes-JSON
+ file and a Constants-JSON file are produced for the Mrvl subgraph
+
+STEP (2) Run Mrvl-ML/AI Backend Compiler to generate model binary for each
Mrvl subgraph
+
+* The Mrvl-ML/AI backend compiler will be distributed as an executable in the
OCTEON SDK; and it can be used to read
+ in Nodes-JSON and Constants-JSON files of each Mrvl subgraph as input
meta-data in order to generate final instructions,
+ in model binary file
+
+* Note: Mrvl-ML/AI backend compiler, which does accelerator-specific
optimization and code generation, is not included
what's the test plan for this RFC? Would it be possible to add the Marvell
backend compiler and simulator to our ci images and run against it in CI?
[ccjoechou writes: for this BYOC-Marvell RFC, the POC PR codebase only contains
code to generate JSON meta files. We have up-streamed our test_mrvl test suite
but only contains JSON codegen. In our next RFC, we will provide runtime &
driver hookups. We are working on a Marvell backend package with Marvell
backend code-gen and Marvell software simulator, which mimics a
cycle-approximate Marvell HW accelerator. This package can become available
later for external usage.
Currently, we are having problems run TVM rust/cargo and can’t find useful
document to debug issues – plus, tvm-build is owned by OctoML (not GitHub TVM,
right?)]
________________________________
In
rfcs/0048-BYOC-Marvell-ML-accelerator-integration.md<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_apache_tvm-2Drfcs_pull_48-23discussion-5Fr787107277&d=DwMFaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=84zI-iH2xz28Q_xujSGbjYaq38CgcRgl_vGzCtF6TwQ&m=VNqzldKdQt96drtn_9Nfv7pyo4q1twvxtd6wMIR7FYI4cpvEKxaaVtBsanbms18J&s=dTFGJaoaEmF7zEr2T3eNCq4rM8GuJUGIcBCKJwUjp7I&e=>:
> +STEP (2) Run Mrvl-ML/AI Backend Compiler to generate model binary for each
> Mrvl subgraph
+
+* The Mrvl-ML/AI backend compiler will be distributed as an executable in the
OCTEON SDK; and it can be used to read
+ in Nodes-JSON and Constants-JSON files of each Mrvl subgraph as input
meta-data in order to generate final instructions,
+ in model binary file
+
+* Note: Mrvl-ML/AI backend compiler, which does accelerator-specific
optimization and code generation, is not included
+ to upstream
+
+STEP (3a) or (3b) Run inference on the software Simulator or on the Mrvl ML/AI
HW accelerator for the Mrvl subgraph
+
+* The Mrvl Software Simulator of the Mrvl ML/AI HW accelerator will be
distributed as an executable in a Mrvl-ML/AI tar
+ ball; and it can be used to read in input file(s) and the model binary to
run inference for the Mrvl subgraph
+
+* Note: Mrvl ML/AI accelerator can run inference in either float16 mode or
int8 quantization mode. For this RFC, we will
+ focus only on float16 inference run
just checking if this was the end of the sentence here
[ccjoechou writes: yes]
________________________________
In
rfcs/0048-BYOC-Marvell-ML-accelerator-integration.md<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_apache_tvm-2Drfcs_pull_48-23discussion-5Fr787114611&d=DwMFaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=84zI-iH2xz28Q_xujSGbjYaq38CgcRgl_vGzCtF6TwQ&m=VNqzldKdQt96drtn_9Nfv7pyo4q1twvxtd6wMIR7FYI4cpvEKxaaVtBsanbms18J&s=ENAAXEINGM7EwToNOLBW3SyS_1du7HQF34XpbsKcVwc&e=>:
> + /* en_id=599 */) /* ty=Tensor[(256, 1568), float32] */;
+ %11 = nn.dense(%9, %10, units=None, out_dtype="float32", /* en_id=600
*/) /* ty=Tensor[(1, 256), float32] */;
+ %12 = add(%11, meta[relay.Constant][5] /* ty=Tensor[(256), float32] */,
+ /* en_id=601 */) /* ty=Tensor[(1, 256), float32] */;
+ %13 = nn.relu(%12, /* en_id=602 */) /* ty=Tensor[(1, 256), float32] */;
+ %14 = transpose(meta[relay.Constant][6] /* ty=Tensor[(256, 10), float32]
*/, axes=[1, 0],
+ /* en_id=675 */) /* ty=Tensor[(10, 256), float32] */;
+ %15 = nn.dense(%13, %14, units=None, out_dtype="float32", /* en_id=676
*/) /* ty=Tensor[(1, 10), float32] */;
+ add(%15, meta[relay.Constant][7] /* ty=Tensor[(10), float32] */, /*
en_id=677 */) /* ty=Tensor[(1, 10), float32] */
+}
+
+```
+
+* We can get to the following one Mrvl subgraph by applying the default
strategy.
+ * in the mrvl.py file: the compute_two_subgraphs() function of the class
MrvlIRGraphUtils is used
+ to create mod_mrvl_subgraph and mod_non_mrvl_subgraph for
could you clarify this sentence?
[ccjoechou writes: did not know how to include a Figure in the RFC file – but I
did include figures at end of the corresponding pre-RFC on the discuss forum –
please check the end of pre-RFC and its figure to see whether they can help
explaining the definition of Marvell sub-graphs here.
https://discuss.tvm.apache.org/t/pre-rfc-byoc-marvell-ml-ai-accelerator-integration/11691]
________________________________
In
rfcs/0048-BYOC-Marvell-ML-accelerator-integration.md<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_apache_tvm-2Drfcs_pull_48-23discussion-5Fr787115633&d=DwMFaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=84zI-iH2xz28Q_xujSGbjYaq38CgcRgl_vGzCtF6TwQ&m=VNqzldKdQt96drtn_9Nfv7pyo4q1twvxtd6wMIR7FYI4cpvEKxaaVtBsanbms18J&s=NMd2x1139DrgTciUNgZ8CD9PiwmazbEys_2ZMegmtEU&e=>:
> + %13 = nn.relu(%12, /* en_id=602 */) /* ty=Tensor[(1, 256), float32] */;
+ %14 = transpose(meta[relay.Constant][6] /* ty=Tensor[(256, 10), float32]
*/, axes=[1, 0],
+ /* en_id=675 */) /* ty=Tensor[(10, 256), float32] */;
+ %15 = nn.dense(%13, %14, units=None, out_dtype="float32", /* en_id=676
*/) /* ty=Tensor[(1, 10), float32] */;
+ add(%15, meta[relay.Constant][7] /* ty=Tensor[(10), float32] */, /*
en_id=677 */) /* ty=Tensor[(1, 10), float32] */
+}
+
+```
+
+* We can get to the following one Mrvl subgraph by applying the default
strategy.
+ * in the mrvl.py file: the compute_two_subgraphs() function of the class
MrvlIRGraphUtils is used
+ to create mod_mrvl_subgraph and mod_non_mrvl_subgraph for
+
+```
+ def @main(%permute_input: Tensor[(1, 1, 28, 28), float32]) -> Tensor[(1,
10), float32] {
+ %0 = @tvmgen_mrvl_main_0(%permute_input, /* en_id=4136 */) /*
ty=Tensor[(1, 28, 28, 1), float32] */;
above, the RFC discusses having exactly one Marvell and non-Marvell subcgraph,
but here I see 8 different function calls. do you mean that there are two
targets, and you partition the graph into 8 subgraphs, but each subgraph is
assigned to one or the other target? (reading further, I can see this is not
the case, but it would help with reader comprehension to clarify this example)
[ccjoechou writes: We are talking about different definitions of “(sub-)graphs”
here. In the TVM partition pass, TVM’s graph or sub-graph is a merge-composite
IR function, which can contain a pre-define pattern of original frontend
operators. In BYOC-Marvell RFC’s definition, a sub-graph is a connected graph
of Marvell-merge-composite functions. For instance, a tvmgen_mrvl_main_4 (see
below in original email), it is a TVM-partition sub-graph, which is a Marvell
merge-composite function containing frontend operators: conv, add, batchnorm,
tuple-get-item, relu. But a Marvell sub-graph contains, in the given test case,
several Marvell merge-composite functions.]
________________________________
In
rfcs/0048-BYOC-Marvell-ML-accelerator-integration.md<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_apache_tvm-2Drfcs_pull_48-23discussion-5Fr787117464&d=DwMFaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=84zI-iH2xz28Q_xujSGbjYaq38CgcRgl_vGzCtF6TwQ&m=VNqzldKdQt96drtn_9Nfv7pyo4q1twvxtd6wMIR7FYI4cpvEKxaaVtBsanbms18J&s=9V5lRxYmfESbgL3yM5Ilb_xMOPZt-l7-zSzW5591Rko&e=>:
> + %3 = @tvmgen_mrvl_main_3(%2, /* en_id=4139 */) /* ty=Tensor[(1, 14,
> 14, 32), float32] */;
+ %4 = @tvmgen_mrvl_main_4(%3, /* en_id=4140 */) /* ty=Tensor[(1, 7, 7,
32), float32] */;
+ %5 = @tvmgen_mrvl_main_5(%4, /* en_id=4141 */) /* ty=Tensor[(1, 1568),
float32] */;
+ %6 = @tvmgen_mrvl_main_6(%5, /* en_id=4142 */) /* ty=Tensor[(1, 256),
float32] */;
+ @tvmgen_mrvl_main_7(%6, /* en_id=4143 */) /* ty=Tensor[(1, 10), float32]
*/
+ }
+```
+
+* In the above Mrvl subgraph, it is formed by "not-yet optimized Marvell
(backend) layers". For example,
+ tvmgen_mrvl_main_0 to tvmgen_mrvl_main_7 are composited/fused Marvell
layers.
+ * In the mrvl.mrvl_pattern_table() function, fusing patterns have been
defined in order to composite
+ original IR nodes into Marvell backend layers.
+ * For example, the following 3 IR call nodes (nn.conv2d + nn.bias_add +
nn.relu) in the original IR graph
+ are composited into one Marvell layer: tvmgen_mrvl_main_1, conceptually
speaking.
+```
+ # from original IR graphs
this process looks rather similar to the device planning pass used in
tvm.relay.build. are they the same? if not, could you motivate why you don't
want to reuse that one?
[ccjoechou: sorry I am not sure what you meant by “device planning pass”? We
have been following what others did in tvm/python/tvm/relay/op/contrib by
utilizing relay passes (for example, ConvertLayout, MergeComposite,
AnnotateTarget, and etc.). Please note that in this RFC, we only want to
generate JSON meta files and we are not ready to propose/up-stream our runtime
& driver hookups yet).]
________________________________
In
rfcs/0048-BYOC-Marvell-ML-accelerator-integration.md<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_apache_tvm-2Drfcs_pull_48-23discussion-5Fr787129775&d=DwMFaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=84zI-iH2xz28Q_xujSGbjYaq38CgcRgl_vGzCtF6TwQ&m=VNqzldKdQt96drtn_9Nfv7pyo4q1twvxtd6wMIR7FYI4cpvEKxaaVtBsanbms18J&s=mipKEVzGwI-kUn_2n_Pb71FU6tS4AsBlfYeJzyoNlJg&e=>:
> +
+ %0 = @tvmgen_mrvl_main_0(%permute_input, /* en_id=4136 */) /*
ty=Tensor[(1, 28, 28, 1), float32] */;
+ %1 = @tvmgen_mrvl_main_1(%0, /* en_id=4137 */) /* ty=Tensor[(1, 28, 28,
64), float32] */;
+ %2 = @tvmgen_mrvl_main_2(%1, /* en_id=4138 */) /* ty=Tensor[(1, 14, 14,
64), float32] */;
+ %3 = @tvmgen_mrvl_main_3(%2, /* en_id=4139 */) /* ty=Tensor[(1, 14, 14,
32), float32] */;
+ %4 = @tvmgen_mrvl_main_4(%3, /* en_id=4140 */) /* ty=Tensor[(1, 7, 7,
32), float32] */;
+
+ def @tvmgen_mrvl_main_0(%mrvl_0_i0: Tensor[(1, 1, 28, 28), float32],
Inline=1, Compiler="mrvl",
+ global_symbol="tvmgen_mrvl_main_0", Primitive=1) -> Tensor[(1, 28,
28, 1), float32] {
+ layout_transform(%mrvl_0_i0, src_layout="NCHW", dst_layout="NHWC",
+ /* en_id=3334 */) /* ty=Tensor[(1, 28, 28, 1), float32] */
+ }
+```
+
+* Currently, in order for the following Marvell classes/functions to identify
a Mrvl subgraphs and a non-Mrvl
+ subgraph from the layout-converted, composited/fused IR graph, we are
utilizing the unique en_id attribute
could you motivate the naming of en_id a bit? i recognize this is a common
thing, but it might be nice to choose a slightly more specific name
[ccjoechou writes: en_id as ExprNode ID. It is an extra field, which has been
defined in the include/./tvm/ir/expr.h file for the RelayExprNode or just
ExprNode class.]
________________________________
In
rfcs/0048-BYOC-Marvell-ML-accelerator-integration.md<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_apache_tvm-2Drfcs_pull_48-23discussion-5Fr787130884&d=DwMFaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=84zI-iH2xz28Q_xujSGbjYaq38CgcRgl_vGzCtF6TwQ&m=VNqzldKdQt96drtn_9Nfv7pyo4q1twvxtd6wMIR7FYI4cpvEKxaaVtBsanbms18J&s=Ew6gvJZix-z7H4QsP5VlpdhjQ4fJ-0-iezoY2L2FyAk&e=>:
> + mod = seq(mod)
+ return mod
+
+ mod_new = tvm.IRModule(mod_mrvl.functions, mod_mrvl.type_definitions)
+ mod_new["main"] = MrvlSubgraphToRevert(mrvl_layers_in_mrvl_subgraph,
mod_mrvl).visit(mod_mrvl["main"])
+ mod_new = relay.transform.RemoveUnusedFunctions()(mod_new)
+ mod_new = relay.transform.InferType()(mod_new)
+ mod_new = run_opt_pass(mod_new, relay.transform.DefuseOps())
+ mod_new = run_opt_pass(mod_new,
relay.transform.ConvertLayout({"nn.conv2d": ["NCHW", "OIHW"], "nn.max_pool2d":
["NCHW"]}))
+ mod_new = run_opt_pass(mod_new, relay.transform.SimplifyExpr())
+ mod_new = run_opt_pass(mod_new,
relay.transform._ffi_api.DropNoopTranspose())
+ mod_new = run_opt_pass(mod_new, relay.transform.InferType())
+ return mod_new
+```
+
+* Marvell-specific graph executor codegen, We have defined call backs and
extension functions in the following files:
could you motivate this further? it's hard to understand why you need to output
your own JSON format without some explanation here.
[ccjoechou writes: the above code block is not to output our own JSON format;
instead, it is to “revert” a sub-graph, which went over Marvell passes (e.g.,
ConvertLayout, MergeComposite, AnnotateTarget, and etc), back to its original,
say, llvm-IR graph. Hence, we are: defuse-ops (opposing to Merge-Composite),
reverted ConvertLayout, and etc. Motivation for reverting back to this
llvm-part subgraph is to allow this llvm-part subgraph to go through TVM
llvm-flow to generate runtime binary.]
________________________________
In
rfcs/0048-BYOC-Marvell-ML-accelerator-integration.md<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_apache_tvm-2Drfcs_pull_48-23discussion-5Fr787131656&d=DwMFaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=84zI-iH2xz28Q_xujSGbjYaq38CgcRgl_vGzCtF6TwQ&m=VNqzldKdQt96drtn_9Nfv7pyo4q1twvxtd6wMIR7FYI4cpvEKxaaVtBsanbms18J&s=rToD4fZ9EIg8eIkLKttKsDNIv0v45-SouZi0No4Qt5g&e=>:
> +```
+
+* the need to link between pre-trained model and final Marvell backend layer -
for instance, through tvm_custom
+ * We did not include prototype code in PR-9730 but intend to provide our
sample changes in another RFC and PR.
+
+
+# Drawbacks
+[drawbacks]: #drawbacks
+
+* We haven't identified any major *not* do items. Several other designs are by
choices - that is we understand that
+ there are benefits for doing or benefits for not-doing.
+
+# Rationale and alternatives
+[rationale-and-alternatives]: #rationale-and-alternatives
+
+* We follow the TVM BYOC framework to enable BYOC Marvell flow without
impacting any TVM core features.
it seems like there has been some impact to the GraphExecutor, and I think one
point of confusion here is whether it was necessary to do that or whether you
could have handled the additional runtime complexity inside a Marvell-specific
runtime.Module. could you explain a bit further here?
[ccjoechou writes: I do not see GraphExecutor term in above. Please provide an
example or point us to a TVM file so we can understand your comment a bit more.
Thanks.]
________________________________
In
rfcs/0048-BYOC-Marvell-ML-accelerator-integration.md<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_apache_tvm-2Drfcs_pull_48-23discussion-5Fr787132217&d=DwMFaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=84zI-iH2xz28Q_xujSGbjYaq38CgcRgl_vGzCtF6TwQ&m=VNqzldKdQt96drtn_9Nfv7pyo4q1twvxtd6wMIR7FYI4cpvEKxaaVtBsanbms18J&s=JRaYKexNQLso0O88polwIXQyGMTNHhdyLbV1bKRfSrM&e=>:
> + bypassing the tvm/Jenkinsfile's tests/scripts/task_rust.sh step. We will
> need help to re-enable the step.
+
+* We like to duplicate the Jenkins environment in order to run tvm/Jenkinsfile
as is, but, we ran into many issues.
+ Currently, we have a tvm-like Jenksinsfile environment to only run a subset
of test suites using a modified
+ Jenkinsfile.
+
+* We have identified a need to allow a call-back function to be registered
when generating Mrvl-BYOC-specific
+ Nodes-JSON file. We are trying to follow TVM Python/CPP-CB style as much as
possible. But, since our callback
+ function
tvm/src/relay/backend/contrib/mrvl/graph_executor_codegen_mrvl.cc::GetExternalJSON()
function is using
+ non-simple argument types, we need help from TVM community to provide
suggestions/guidelines in order to make
+ new CB code better to meet TVM community requirements here.
+
+* For one Mrvl-BYOC relay transformation pass, we have identified a need to
inject a (global) expr node ID for the
+ RelayExprNode class and its derived classes: Tuple and CallNode, so that
during the transformation pass, we can
+ uniquely identify each Tuple or CallNode object. Again, we need help from
TVM community to provide
+ suggestions/guidelines here in order to know whether this is one of the best
ways to achieve the Mrvl-BYOC need.
i think it would help to spell out why you guys need to be able to identify
each expression here.
[ccjoechou writes: yes but not just us but a data-scientist customer who is
using TVM flow may like to know, for example, the linkages between the runtime
performance #s and their corresponding user frontend model’s operators (e.g.,
each expression).]
________________________________
In
rfcs/0048-BYOC-Marvell-ML-accelerator-integration.md<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_apache_tvm-2Drfcs_pull_48-23discussion-5Fr787132545&d=DwMFaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=84zI-iH2xz28Q_xujSGbjYaq38CgcRgl_vGzCtF6TwQ&m=VNqzldKdQt96drtn_9Nfv7pyo4q1twvxtd6wMIR7FYI4cpvEKxaaVtBsanbms18J&s=dIcIPdSahtIX9piD7O2f_UhKljEWi-K6XvL8MI3svgY&e=>:
> + RelayExprNode class and its derived classes: Tuple and CallNode, so that
> during the transformation pass, we can
+ uniquely identify each Tuple or CallNode object. Again, we need help from
TVM community to provide
+ suggestions/guidelines here in order to know whether this is one of the best
ways to achieve the Mrvl-BYOC need.
+
+* We also identified a need to maintain linkages between
(operator-)information described in the original, given
+ pre-trained network model and the code-gen JSON files so that the compiler
backend will be able to report user-level
+ (e.g., meaningful-to-user) messages regarding the given pre-trained network.
For instance, in the
+ tvm/python/tvm/relay/frontend/onnx.py and common.py files, we can see
user-level information being captured using
+ “tvm_custom” related code as in original onnx.py file for the given
pre-trained network; but, in common.py, the code
+ later drops the linkage, via attrs.pop(“tvm_custom”), and does not pass the
linkage onto the initial relay IR graph.
+ We have a draft solution to maintain linkages between the given pre-trained
network model and its relay IR graph
+ (using expr node ID and tvm custom ID, plus, a few utility functions), but
would like to know whether the TVM
+ community has any better or work-in-progress resolution.
+
+* When using TVM RPC code to exercise and run inference on a remote-hosted
Mrvl ML/AI HW accelerator for the Mrvl
+ subgraph, we ran into one minor issue and have made local TVM RPC
enhancement so that, when a TVM RPC client sends
could you explain the nature of the problem that requires the client to know
the absolute path?
[ccjoechou writes: First, the TVM RPC server choses path for any uploaded file
under tmp randomly (which can be good to reduce possible security problem).
But, in our use case, we like to have the TVM RPC client to send a “runtime”
command to the RPC server side to pre-process the just uploaded file before the
file can be consumed autonomously by the RPC server using pre-defined script.
We can’t find a way or via a TVM example, which shows how this can be done.]
________________________________
In
rfcs/0048-BYOC-Marvell-ML-accelerator-integration.md<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_apache_tvm-2Drfcs_pull_48-23discussion-5Fr787133542&d=DwMFaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=84zI-iH2xz28Q_xujSGbjYaq38CgcRgl_vGzCtF6TwQ&m=VNqzldKdQt96drtn_9Nfv7pyo4q1twvxtd6wMIR7FYI4cpvEKxaaVtBsanbms18J&s=9sG9W_t_KkSawUyjosauynkwCGnYieI8qZo2TOrwXQU&e=>:
> + pre-trained network model and the code-gen JSON files so that the compiler
> backend will be able to report user-level
+ (e.g., meaningful-to-user) messages regarding the given pre-trained network.
For instance, in the
+ tvm/python/tvm/relay/frontend/onnx.py and common.py files, we can see
user-level information being captured using
+ “tvm_custom” related code as in original onnx.py file for the given
pre-trained network; but, in common.py, the code
+ later drops the linkage, via attrs.pop(“tvm_custom”), and does not pass the
linkage onto the initial relay IR graph.
+ We have a draft solution to maintain linkages between the given pre-trained
network model and its relay IR graph
+ (using expr node ID and tvm custom ID, plus, a few utility functions), but
would like to know whether the TVM
+ community has any better or work-in-progress resolution.
+
+* When using TVM RPC code to exercise and run inference on a remote-hosted
Mrvl ML/AI HW accelerator for the Mrvl
+ subgraph, we ran into one minor issue and have made local TVM RPC
enhancement so that, when a TVM RPC client sends
+ a file to the remote server, the TVM RPC client can know where the remote
server saves the file on the remote machine.
+ Since this is not directly related to this Mrvl-BYOC PR, we will find time
to contribute this enhance back in another
+ TVM PR soon.
+
+* In order for us to generate the constants-JSON file, we must “NOT” remove
external params, which were stored in
why is this? params passed in MetadataModule are meant for consumption only by
the runtime.Module which defines them. it seems like perhaps you need to
consume them at the executor level. could you explain that?
[ccjoechou writes: We are using relay to generate JSON meta files representing
the given network model in a way our backend code can process directly (e.g.,
only the marvell-part sub-graph(s). If we have include 100% of our backend code
in the TVM codebase, then, we do not need to dump constants in JSON mega file;
but, due to our backend code is built outside the typical TVM flow and can do
other compile-time optimization including manipulating constants, we need
constants JSON.]
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on
GitHub<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_apache_tvm-2Drfcs_pull_48-23pullrequestreview-2D855912667&d=DwMFaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=84zI-iH2xz28Q_xujSGbjYaq38CgcRgl_vGzCtF6TwQ&m=VNqzldKdQt96drtn_9Nfv7pyo4q1twvxtd6wMIR7FYI4cpvEKxaaVtBsanbms18J&s=L2xG3uKvJ4yJ_ixp1fyRD1bRTpZgR-yWZtSVJPsEHLo&e=>,
or
unsubscribe<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_notifications_unsubscribe-2Dauth_AM636PACHANYNAATB4KA7B3UWXGYFANCNFSM5KJYF53A&d=DwMFaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=84zI-iH2xz28Q_xujSGbjYaq38CgcRgl_vGzCtF6TwQ&m=VNqzldKdQt96drtn_9Nfv7pyo4q1twvxtd6wMIR7FYI4cpvEKxaaVtBsanbms18J&s=NB9WVT4nlWSlIeHit8jurEkvilrrj22R7iAhBtdylbI&e=>.
Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for
iOS<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__apps.apple.com_app_apple-2Dstore_id1477376905-3Fct-3Dnotification-2Demail-26mt-3D8-26pt-3D524675&d=DwMFaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=84zI-iH2xz28Q_xujSGbjYaq38CgcRgl_vGzCtF6TwQ&m=VNqzldKdQt96drtn_9Nfv7pyo4q1twvxtd6wMIR7FYI4cpvEKxaaVtBsanbms18J&s=-StSSo5XOXXHK4bMwp_B8eLiRGQ0DXvLD_42vrZOwyQ&e=>
or
Android<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__play.google.com_store_apps_details-3Fid-3Dcom.github.android-26referrer-3Dutm-5Fcampaign-253Dnotification-2Demail-2526utm-5Fmedium-253Demail-2526utm-5Fsource-253Dgithub&d=DwMFaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=84zI-iH2xz28Q_xujSGbjYaq38CgcRgl_vGzCtF6TwQ&m=VNqzldKdQt96drtn_9Nfv7pyo4q1twvxtd6wMIR7FYI4cpvEKxaaVtBsanbms18J&s=HJ1qy1TGjh0KDSnnPWyF-MoI-UYA3X9I_er2DAq4ICs&e=>.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/apache/tvm-rfcs/pull/48#issuecomment-1015958031
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: <apache/tvm-rfcs/pull/48/[email protected]>
