-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14
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.
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
Migrate tt-explorer into tt-mlir repo #945
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As mentioned throughout the code comments, the changes are valid and exciting (bar some cosmetic differences).
My main concern is that I've been working on a pretty major shift into how MLIR will be parsed by tt-adapter
to allow for the visualization of TTNN modules. For this reason, I think that if this initial migration isn't too urgent, we could add these changes in from tt-adapter
without much conflict. My schedule is to have these changes done over the weekend and ready by Monday. Let me know what you think
op_to_graph_node = dict() | ||
|
||
for op in module.body.operations: | ||
append_later = [] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Any reason we're choosing not to parse the ModuleOps? They would represent the op
iter at this level.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It did not seem useful visually.
@vprajapati-tt There is no rush in migrating this over, tho i don't want to keep development going in the other repos for long. I think that it makes sense to wait for you to finish the changes and then figure out what the initial commit will look like. |
|
||
for operand in op.operands: | ||
if operand.owner == block and operand not in op_to_graph_node: | ||
# This is a constant and we need to create a node for it. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@vprajapati-tt While playing with the tool it seemed like it was very useful to have inputs / weights represented as visual nodes as well. What do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah! This makes sense, I didn't do too much testing with graphs that had weights so this is reasonable.
6f58f69
to
18ba484
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Changes look good to me! Thanks for all the help with the migration.
1cf8449
to
3b2929b
Compare
@nsmithtt I think that your review is required as a codeowner. Can you please take a look? |
3b2929b
to
6cbb8fa
Compare
6cbb8fa
to
87ed18f
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good!
Add minimal version of tt-explorer tool for MLIR visualization:
Next steps:
Closes #934