ganler commented on code in PR #14417:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tvm/pull/14417#discussion_r1152449966
##########
src/relax/ir/dataflow_matcher.cc:
##########
@@ -541,15 +541,21 @@ struct RNode {
* \brief This method try to match a real node and a pattern node along with
its neighbors.
*/
static bool try_match(PNode* p, RNode* r, DFPatternMatcher* m,
- const std::map<const VarNode*, std::set<const
VarNode*>>& def2use,
+ const std::map<const VarNode*, std::vector<const
VarNode*>>& def2use,
const std::map<const VarNode*, std::vector<const
VarNode*>>& use2def) {
- if (nullptr != p->matched && p->matched == r->ptr) return true; // matched
before.
+ if (p->matched != nullptr && p->matched == r->ptr) return true; // matched
before.
if (!m->Match(GetRef<DFPattern>(p->ptr), GetRef<Var>(r->ptr))) return false;
std::stack<std::pair<PNode*, RNode*>> undo_stack{};
const auto commit = [&undo_stack](PNode* p, RNode* r) {
// match with each other.
+ // TODO(ganler, masahi): Why commit on the same p-r pair happens more than
once?
Review Comment:
I see. Because the constraint or relation between nodes may or may not be
single-way so in the beginning I made it bidirectional such that the pattern
can be matched as long as you can let any node of the matched subgraph be start
hint.
For example, for A->B pattern, you can start matching from either A or B
(forward or backward).
Specifying certain matching order definitely makes the code logic and
debugging easier but I am afraid it also cuts the flexibility in some way. Not
sure if it is worth to have some flexibility or if we can keep them both.
--
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]
