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

Reduce diff with upstream code #2940

Draft
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

etiotto
Copy link
Contributor

@etiotto etiotto commented Dec 5, 2024

No description provided.

Signed-off-by: Tiotto, Ettore <ettore.tiotto@intel.com>
@etiotto etiotto self-assigned this Dec 5, 2024
Signed-off-by: Tiotto, Ettore <ettore.tiotto@intel.com>
// Dispatch to the corresponding dialect helper function to print the layout.
os << triton::gpu::getLayoutStr(tensorType, UseHWPointOfView);
return success();
if (dialectName == "ttg") {
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This code is the same as upstream, however it may not work for us. @chengjunlu ?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No, this code wouldn't work for us.
We need to PR the changes to upstream to enable this tool work for third party dialect.

auto shared = dyn_cast_or_null<triton::gpu::SharedEncodingAttr>(
dstType.getEncoding());
auto shared =
dyn_cast<triton::gpu::SharedEncodingAttr>(dstType.getEncoding());
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This would make benchmark fail for the advanced path ? @quintinwang5 did you try to upstream this change ?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Submitted something like this. They told me in ttgir every tensor must have a layout. So I think this is also unreasonable.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We can remove this pass for advance path. Right? Because there is no convert layout operation used in advance path.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants