Skip to content

Conversation

@kshitij12345
Copy link
Collaborator

Follow-up from #52194 based on comment #52194 (comment)

@facebook-github-bot
Copy link
Contributor

facebook-github-bot commented Mar 30, 2021

🔗 Helpful links

💊 CI failures summary and remediations

As of commit 8d3eef6 (more details on the Dr. CI page):


Commit 8d3eef6 was recently pushed. Waiting for builds...


This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI (expand for details).Follow this link to opt-out of these comments for your Pull Requests.

Please report bugs/suggestions to the (internal) Dr. CI Users group.

Click here to manually regenerate this comment.

@kshitij12345 kshitij12345 requested a review from mruberry March 30, 2021 06:37
@kshitij12345 kshitij12345 marked this pull request as ready for review March 30, 2021 06:37
@kshitij12345 kshitij12345 changed the title clamp: test with either min or max [testing] clamp: test with either min or max Mar 30, 2021
@mruberry
Copy link
Collaborator

mruberry commented Apr 5, 2021

This is cool but I'm wondering if we should continue to treat clamp as a unary op since @peterbell10 is working on adding support min and max tensors, see here: #52695.

What are your thoughts, @peterbell10?

@peterbell10
Copy link
Collaborator

In my PR I keep the existing UnaryUfuncInfo and add a new OpInfo for the multi-tensor variants.

@mruberry
Copy link
Collaborator

Sorry @kshitij12345, looks like this slipped through the cracks. With @peterbell10's answer and updates to common_method_invocations.py, are there parts of this PR we still want? If so, let's update it and get it landed quickly!

@mruberry
Copy link
Collaborator

Ping on this older PR, too, @kshitij12345 -- is there something here we should update and land or should we close this?

@pytorchbot
Copy link
Collaborator

Looks like this PR hasn't been updated in a while so we're going to go ahead and mark this as Stale.
Feel free to remove the Stale label if you feel this was a mistake.
If you are unable to remove the Stale label please contact a maintainer in order to do so.
Stale pull requests will automatically be closed 30 days after being marked Stale

@kshitij12345
Copy link
Collaborator Author

NOTE to self : Verify if the changes are still relevant.

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Looks like this PR hasn't been updated in a while so we're going to go ahead and mark this as Stale.
Feel free to remove the Stale label if you feel this was a mistake.
If you are unable to remove the Stale label please contact a maintainer in order to do so.
If you want the bot to never mark this PR stale again, add the no-stale label.
Stale pull requests will automatically be closed after 30 days of inactivity.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale label Jun 26, 2022
@github-actions github-actions bot closed this Jul 26, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants