anijain2305 edited a comment on pull request #7613: URL: https://github.com/apache/tvm/pull/7613#issuecomment-793497261
I see, yeah that should be ok. Maybe it's not relevant to this PR but there is a slight catch about `requantize`. I was hoping that the `requantize` could also be represented using the `simulate_q` (or `simualted_requantize` op) where both `in_dtype` and `out_dtype` are integers (while the actual in/out tensors are fp32). The issue representing `requantize` with a sequence of `quantize-dequantize` is that requantize's integer-only computation gives different results compared to the sequence of quantize-dequantize (the deviation grows further for <8 bits). If there was just one op, then we can simulate `requantize` with hopefully more fidelity (should help QAT as well in future). But I totally understand that it can make design complicated and maybe also difficult to pattern match. Please give it a thought and see if this is helpful in overall design (or this PR in any way). Otherwise, please feel free to ignore. ---------------------------------------------------------------- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
