[RFC] UMA: Universal Modular Accelerator Interface

[cgerum]

@manupa-arm

@MJKlaiber

> class MyCustomAcceleratorPartitioner(UMAPartitioner):
    @property
    def target_name(self):
        return "my_custom_accelerator"

    def _register_patterns(self):
        self._register_pattern("conv1d_relu", conv1d_relu_pattern())
    
    def _register_relay_passes(self):
        self._register_relay_pass(1, ConfigGenerator())
        self._register_relay_pass(2, BufferScopeAnnotator())
> ```

Since the proposal suggests to use the properly registered targets, any reason should we stick to target_name (str) as opposed to the actual TargetKind ?

Our current PoC implementation uses KCompiler Attributes and the Standard MergeComposite, AnnotateTarget, MergeCompilerRegions.

Following up on the above question, what are your thoughts on moving the UMAPartitioner inside relay.build(…) ?

The current plan is to move to the collage implementation by @mbs-octoml as soon as possible which would move partitioning into the relay.build.