[pre-RFC] Compilation Configuration Representation

[manupa-arm]

Hi @tqchen and @zxybach,

cc : @mbaret

What is a Composite Target ?

TVM being a multi-target compiler, it would be a bit confusing to use a Array of Targets as another Composite Target – I think its the terminology what is confusing here.

A composite target sounds like a target that codegen intimately in a single codegen path for different devices rather than a structure that is used by TVM to trigger different codegen flows. I think we all agree we need a way to communicate this Options/Flags through out the lowering but I personally would not be in favor of attaching this to a (Composite) target – that result in overloading the term “Target”.

@tqchen

We get the benefit of being able to tag, and record target

I believe we can still do it as the target is part of the CompilationConfig

@tqchen

CompilationOption can appear as a field of sub-target of something else. Imagine that we need to offload a subgraph to another customized compilation, which may needs its own specification of the heterogenous “targets”.

CompilationConfig is supposed to contain attributes that are not specific to a target. Thus, they would be still accesible in the IRModule. Wont they ?

@tqchen

Same API argument(Target) for both graph level compilation and operator level compilation.

This could also be said with respect to CompilationConfig being available for both graph level compilation and operator level compilation – just that “targets” are part of CompilationConfig.

In a summary what we need to discuss is :

• What is the best term to use to structure that holds information/flags that are target independent and hold the set of targets in the same time?
• Moreover, it would be great to reserve the term “Composite” target to a target that intimately codegen to multiple devices without divergence in the compilation pathway.