@MichaelJKlaiber, I did another pass. It is looking good! >From my side, Ideally, there are only two things that we need to agree upon on >the design (which relates two outstanding conversations above).
A1. The rationale to use the int-based phase in registering passes. A2. The methodology to attach target-specific options that affects multiple passes in the lowering. For A2, it would be bit important to reach a conclusion where we could point future contributors/users who want to use UMA for upstream/downstream development, respectively. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/apache/tvm-rfcs/pull/60#issuecomment-1102302842 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: <apache/tvm-rfcs/pull/60/c1102302...@github.com>
