This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 17, 2023. It is now read-only.
[EXECUTOR] Experimental Mirror option to squeez mem #884
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| @@ -62,7 +66,7 @@ std::vector<uint32_t> StaticGraph::TopoSort() const { | |||
| head_nodes.push_back(static_cast<uint32_t>(i)); | |||
| } | |||
| } | |||
| return PostDFSOrder(head_nodes); | |||
| return PostDFSOrder(head_nodes, {}); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
change {} to {{}} to make it compile in gcc 4.9. Need to change several places for same reason.
|
CIFAR-10 No BN:
|
|
@antinucleon Please do a review again |
|
CIFAR-10, without CuDNN, with BN
CIFAR-10, with CuDNN, with BN
|
|
LGTM, merge first, I will try to fix BN |
antinucleon
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 19, 2015
[EXECUTOR] Experimental Mirror option to squeez mem
|
mark! I'll try to use maxnet |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
as discussed with @antinucleon and @mavenlin . Can you two help review this PR? I want to make sure code is correct before merge in