[quant][graphmode][api] Add backend_config_dict to prepare_fx api #64135
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
Summary: We want to start aligning the api with the design in https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/wiki/Extending-PyTorch-Quantization-to-Custom-Backends We plan to gradually move things from `prepare_custom_config_dict` and `convert_custom_config_dict` to `backend_config_dict` and allow custom backend developer to define their own way of quantizing operators. Test Plan: python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizeFx python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizeFxOps Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: [ghstack-poisoned]
This was referenced Aug 28, 2021
🔗 Helpful links
💊 CI failures summary and remediationsAs of commit 0fe5109 (more details on the Dr. CI page): 💚 💚 Looks good so far! There are no failures yet. 💚 💚 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. |
jerryzh168
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 28, 2021
Summary: We want to start aligning the api with the design in https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/wiki/Extending-PyTorch-Quantization-to-Custom-Backends We plan to gradually move things from `prepare_custom_config_dict` and `convert_custom_config_dict` to `backend_config_dict` and allow custom backend developer to define their own way of quantizing operators. Test Plan: python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizeFx python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizeFxOps Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: ghstack-source-id: c3bac76 Pull Request resolved: #64135
…_fx api" Summary: We want to start aligning the api with the design in https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/wiki/Extending-PyTorch-Quantization-to-Custom-Backends We plan to gradually move things from `prepare_custom_config_dict` and `convert_custom_config_dict` to `backend_config_dict` and allow custom backend developer to define their own way of quantizing operators. Test Plan: python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizeFx python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizeFxOps Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: [ghstack-poisoned]
jerryzh168
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 28, 2021
Summary: We want to start aligning the api with the design in https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/wiki/Extending-PyTorch-Quantization-to-Custom-Backends We plan to gradually move things from `prepare_custom_config_dict` and `convert_custom_config_dict` to `backend_config_dict` and allow custom backend developer to define their own way of quantizing operators. Test Plan: python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizeFx python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizeFxOps Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: ghstack-source-id: 3680548 Pull Request resolved: #64135
…_fx api" Summary: We want to start aligning the api with the design in https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/wiki/Extending-PyTorch-Quantization-to-Custom-Backends We plan to gradually move things from `prepare_custom_config_dict` and `convert_custom_config_dict` to `backend_config_dict` and allow custom backend developer to define their own way of quantizing operators. Test Plan: python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizeFx python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizeFxOps Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: [ghstack-poisoned]
jerryzh168
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 30, 2021
Summary: We want to start aligning the api with the design in https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/wiki/Extending-PyTorch-Quantization-to-Custom-Backends We plan to gradually move things from `prepare_custom_config_dict` and `convert_custom_config_dict` to `backend_config_dict` and allow custom backend developer to define their own way of quantizing operators. Test Plan: python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizeFx python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizeFxOps Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: ghstack-source-id: 9b9ce8a Pull Request resolved: #64135
…_fx api" Summary: We want to start aligning the api with the design in https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/wiki/Extending-PyTorch-Quantization-to-Custom-Backends We plan to gradually move things from `prepare_custom_config_dict` and `convert_custom_config_dict` to `backend_config_dict` and allow custom backend developer to define their own way of quantizing operators. Test Plan: python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizeFx python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizeFxOps Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: [ghstack-poisoned]
vkuzo
approved these changes
Sep 1, 2021
…_fx api" Summary: We want to start aligning the api with the design in https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/wiki/Extending-PyTorch-Quantization-to-Custom-Backends We plan to gradually move things from `prepare_custom_config_dict` and `convert_custom_config_dict` to `backend_config_dict` and allow custom backend developer to define their own way of quantizing operators. Test Plan: python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizeFx python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizeFxOps Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: [ghstack-poisoned]
|
@jerryzh168 has imported this pull request. If you are a Facebook employee, you can view this diff on Phabricator. |
| with a similar structure as qconfig_dict except it will contain | ||
| configurations specific to equalization techniques such as input-weight | ||
| equalization. | ||
| `backend_config_dict`: a dictionary that specifies how operators are quantized |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we update this to what is supported currently? Right now, this PR is just introducing the argument, should we have some functionality with this dict before adding it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ah, that is introduced in the next PR.. sorry, will probably merge these things next time I add a new argument
|
This pull request has been merged in 7ffcf15. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
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.
Stack from ghstack:
Summary:
We want to start aligning the api with the design in https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/wiki/Extending-PyTorch-Quantization-to-Custom-Backends
We plan to gradually move things from
prepare_custom_config_dictandconvert_custom_config_dictto
backend_config_dictand allow custom backend developer to define their own way of quantizing operators.Test Plan:
python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizeFx
python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizeFxOps
Reviewers:
Subscribers:
Tasks:
Tags:
Differential Revision: D30699456