@wrongtest Thanks for bringing up this. There are a few options for the behavior in TVM script, I'm open to discussion.
* A1: The original behavior before https://github.com/apache/tvm/pull/9727: `T.allocate` returns a `Var`, which can be later used in `T.load / T.store`. * A2: Current behavior: `T.allocate` returns a buffer (`Var` is implicitly created inside). The buffer can be accessed via subscripts, which will be translated to `BufferLoad / BufferStore`. * A3: Potential behavior for this RFC: `T.allocate` returns a `Var`, use `T.decl_buffer` to create buffer and access it (because `T.load / T.store` are deprecated). This follows the translation to TIR nodes closely. * A4: Potential behavior for this RFC (the one @wrongtest is proposing): If there are no buffer aliases (in most of the cases), it is tempting to avoid boilerplate code of `T.decl_buffer`. `T.allocate` returns a buffer, where `buffer->data` is implicitly created and allocated inside. The buffer can be accessed via subscripts. Subsequent buffer aliases can be created by referring to `buffer->data`. This requires `DeclBuffer` to be created implicitly, it is okay to have some discrepancy between parser side and the TIR nodes. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/apache/tvm-rfcs/pull/70#issuecomment-1124141811 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: <apache/tvm-rfcs/pull/70/c1124141...@github.com>
