Lunderberg commented on issue #17235:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tvm/issues/17235#issuecomment-2266148722

   Well, I've got good news and bad news.  The good news is that bug can be 
boiled down to even simpler minimal case, and can be resolved by #16183.
   
   ```python
   import tvm
   from tvm.script import ir as I, relax as R
   
   @I.ir_module
   class Module:
       @R.function
       def main():
           return (42,)
   
   built = tvm.relax.build(Module, target="llvm")
   vm = tvm.relax.VirtualMachine(built, tvm.cpu())
   output = vm["main"]()
   
   # With https://github.com/apache/tvm/pull/16183, these asserts pass.
   assert len(output) == 1
   assert isinstance(output[0], int)
   assert output[0] == 42
   ```
   
   The downside is that #16183 is an absolute beast of a PR, touches pretty 
much every single part of TVM, caused and resolved breakage in unit tests 
across the board, and comes with my sincere apologies to code reviewers.  (But 
still a worthwhile change to make.)
   
   The root cause is that there are two distinct ways to represent an integer 
in the TVM.  It can be stored in the `TVMRetValue` type, with the `kDLInt` type 
code, or as part of the `tvm::Object`/`tvm::ObjectRef` hierarchy.  There are 
some parts of the codebase that require a `kDLInt`, such as passing an integer 
to a native func.  There are other parts of the codebase that require an 
`ObjectRef`, such as storing an integer in a `tvm.runtime.Container`.  There 
are some automatic conversions applied in the FFI (e.g. converting from 
`kDLInt` to a `tvm.tir.IntImm`), but extending them would continue a trend of 
using compile-time types as part of the runtime library, and wouldn't be a good 
long-term plan.  In part, PR #16183 is so large because it re-establishes the 
division between the compile-time and runtime types, and then needed to update 
every location that relied on no-longer-present automatic conversions.
   
   I'm going to merge `main` into the #16183 branch, to make sure the CI 
results aren't stale, and will see next week if I can get somebody to tackle 
the code review of it.


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@tvm.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

Reply via email to