Add More Shape Functions #4179
Add More Shape Functions #4179
Conversation
kevinthesun
force-pushed
the
AddShapeFunc
branch
from
7e17e4a
to
779e087
Compare
| oshape.Set(2, (dshape_nchw[2] + param->padding[0] * 2 | ||
| - dilated_ksize_y) / param->strides[0] + 1); | ||
| } else { | ||
| oshape.Set(2, dshape_nchw[2]); |
kevinthesun
force-pushed
the
AddShapeFunc
branch
from
f775105
to
ae156fe
Compare
| axis_record = _create_axis_record(attrs, inputs) | ||
| return [_reduce_shape_func(inputs[0], convert(axis_record))] | ||
|
|
||
| _reg.register_shape_func("argmax", False, reduce_shape_func) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If I get it correctly, all function in this file has reduce_schedule and reduce_shape_func.
can we use a for loop instead?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Registering schedule/shapefunc line by line should be cleaner when later we introduce some ops which require different sch/shapefunc implementation. Also this way is adopted across all relay op files. I think it's a good idea to keep them consistent
kevinthesun
force-pushed
the
AddShapeFunc
branch
from
3978aef
to
01a3665
Compare
|
Thanks @kevinthesun |
* Add shape functions * Fix get_const_tuple * Fix cpplint * Fix pylint * Fix pylint * rebase and fix * Check Any for infer type * Fix expand_dim shape func for zero rank input * Fix pooling infer type * Address comment * Register layout transform attr
|
minor: would it be better to call it |
|
I would prefer register_rt_shape_func or just keep register_shape_func. Is it bad to think it is similar to type_rel? |
Add shape functions for:
nn: conv2d_NCHWc, pool2d, global_pool2d, batch_flatten, dense, pad, relu, bias_add, softmax.
transform: layout_transform, expand_dim, transpose, squeeze, reshape_like
tensor: elemwise
reduce
Also fix some type inference to support dynamic shape.
Related RFC: #4118
@icemelon9 @wweic @yongwww