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

ONNX debug improvements #1712

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Apr 30, 2024
Merged

Conversation

antimora
Copy link
Collaborator

Minor ONNX debug improvements.

Pull Request Template

Checklist

  • Confirmed that run-checks all script has been executed.
  • Made sure the book is up to date with changes in this PR.

Related Issues/PRs

#1560

Changes

  1. Collect missing Op names and display at once.
  2. Other minor improvements.

Testing

Tested on the user's onnx file.

@antimora antimora requested a review from laggui April 30, 2024 17:26
Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 30, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 81.25000% with 3 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 86.41%. Comparing base (1cdceb5) to head (bb89dbd).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Files Patch % Lines
crates/burn-import/src/onnx/to_burn.rs 66.66% 2 Missing ⚠️
crates/burn-import/src/onnx/op_configuration.rs 50.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1712      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   86.51%   86.41%   -0.10%     
==========================================
  Files         696      698       +2     
  Lines       81498    81797     +299     
==========================================
+ Hits        70506    70683     +177     
- Misses      10992    11114     +122     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Member

@laggui laggui left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, just had a question related to one of the comments.

@@ -569,8 +569,9 @@ pub fn reshape_config(node: &Node) -> Vec<i64> {
panic!("Zero shape size is not supported");
}

// TODO: check "shape" attribute
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this specific to an opset that's not supported yet, hence the "TODO"?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, correct. I do not have a specific use case but since we handle similar one and I noticed from the spec, we are missing it. I just added TODO as a debt, which we do not need to make a payment on.

@antimora antimora merged commit ff9e875 into tracel-ai:main Apr 30, 2024
14 checks passed
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.

2 participants