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

[SME] Extract gemm block correctly when fused with bias #17076

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 11, 2024

Conversation

lhutton1
Copy link
Contributor

Prior to this commit, the scheduling assumed the gemm block would be the second to last block in the function ("unpadding" step is the final block). However, when dense is fused with a bias or activation the gemm block is no longer the second to last block. This commit instead searches a single reduction block to use as the gemm block.

cc @ekalda @Anndrey24

Prior to this commit, the scheduling assumed the gemm block would
be the second to last block in the function ("unpadding" step is the
final block). However, when dense is fused with a bias or activation
the gemm block is no longer the second to last block. This commit
instead searches a single reduction block to use as the gemm block.

Change-Id: I1932a490bb3fb72c0c081862349486838c15e6de
@github-actions github-actions bot requested a review from ekalda June 10, 2024 09:05
Copy link
Contributor

@ekalda ekalda left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good to me in general, the only thing I was wondering is that the commit message says that this fix addresses case where there is fused bias or activation (or I suppose both?) but the testing only covers bias case? I suppose the TIR looks similar for all of these cases though, so I won't block the patch for that.

@lhutton1
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yep exactly, functionality-wise nothing changes. Happy to adjust the commit message to what is being tested.

@lhutton1 lhutton1 changed the title [SME] Extract gemm block correctly when fused with bias/activation [SME] Extract gemm block correctly when fused with bias Jun 10, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@ekalda ekalda left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, thanks @lhutton1!

@ekalda ekalda merged commit d1cd95f into apache:main Jun 11, 2024
21 checks passed
@lhutton1 lhutton1 deleted the sme-fix-dense-with-bias branch June 11, 2024 08:44
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.

None yet

2 participants