Skip to content

[quant] Use PlaceholderObserver instead of Fp16Observer and NoopObserver #42348

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Closed
supriyar wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

[quant] Use PlaceholderObserver instead of Fp16Observer and NoopObserver #42348

supriyar wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

@supriyar
Copy link
Contributor

@supriyar supriyar commented Jul 31, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Stack from ghstack:

Summary:
Use the dtype info in placeholderObserver to decide what ops to insert in the graph
In the next PR we can delete NoopObserver

Test Plan:
python test/test_quantization.py

Reviewers:

Subscribers:

Tasks:

Tags:

Differential Revision: D22859457

@supriyar
[quant] Use PlaceholderObserver instead of Fp16Observer and NoopObserver
6a4201e 
Summary:
Use the dtype info in placeholderObserver to decide what ops to insert in the graph
In the next PR we can delete NoopObserver

Test Plan:
python test/test_quantization.py

Reviewers:

Subscribers:

Tasks:

Tags:

[ghstack-poisoned]
@supriyar supriyar requested a review from apaszke as a code owner July 31, 2020 01:28
This was referenced Jul 31, 2020
Closed
Closed
Closed
supriyar added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 31, 2020
@supriyar
[quant] Use PlaceholderObserver instead of Fp16Observer and NoopObserver
45760a4 
Summary:
Use the dtype info in placeholderObserver to decide what ops to insert in the graph
In the next PR we can delete NoopObserver

Test Plan:
python test/test_quantization.py

Reviewers:

Subscribers:

Tasks:

Tags:

ghstack-source-id: c519789
Pull Request resolved: #42348
@facebook-github-bot facebook-github-bot added the oncall: jit Add this issue/PR to JIT oncall triage queue label Jul 31, 2020
@supriyar supriyar requested review from jerryzh168, vkuzo and z-a-f July 31, 2020 01:45
jerryzh168
jerryzh168 approved these changes Jul 31, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@jerryzh168 jerryzh168 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks!

@facebook-github-bot
Copy link
Contributor

facebook-github-bot commented Jul 31, 2020

This pull request has been merged in 38bf5be.

@facebook-github-bot facebook-github-bot deleted the gh/supriyar/154/head branch August 4, 2020 14:15
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@jerryzh168 jerryzh168 jerryzh168 approved these changes

@apaszke apaszke Awaiting requested review from apaszke

@vkuzo vkuzo Awaiting requested review from vkuzo

@z-a-f z-a-f Awaiting requested review from z-a-f

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

Merged oncall: jit Add this issue/PR to JIT oncall triage queue

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@supriyar @facebook-github-bot @jerryzh168 @mruberry