Lunderberg commented on PR #10907: URL: https://github.com/apache/tvm/pull/10907#issuecomment-1090410339
For moving the implementation from the session to the launcher, is that primarily to allow them to be overloaded by the `HexagonLauncherAndroid` and `HexagonLauncherSimulator` subclasses? Otherwise, I'm not quite following how moving the implementation from `Session` to `HexagonLauncherRPC` would avoid the re-use of the session object. I had been thinking of the session as the primary way that a real or simulated device is exposed to the user, since it holds the `session.device`, and wanted to avoid requiring test code to interact with both a launcher and a session generated from that launcher. Since the session is always generated from a launcher, the session can track which launcher it was generated from, and delegate any functionality that is needed at that point. That said, whichever has the full implementation should be called by the other. On a re-read, I realized that I didn't `HexagonLauncherRPC.get_graph_executor` and `HexagonLauncherRPC.get_aot_executor` functions should be updated to directly call the `Session` functions, so the two have different accepted argument types. -- 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. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
