ednesday, April 10, 2019 1:34 PM
> To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [MXNET 2.0 Wishlist] [DISCUSS] Refine the InferStorageType and
> memory planning pass
>
> Agreed with Tianqi that we could have better implementation once we have
> better tvm nnvm v2 i
s proposal to get more ideas from the community.
> >
> >
> > -tao
> >
> > -----Original Message-
> > From: Skalicky, Sam [mailto:sska...@amazon.com.INVALID]
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2019 2:24 AM
> > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
>
maintainability, testability and readability - that's why I sent out this
> proposal to get more ideas from the community.
>
>
> -tao
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Skalicky, Sam [mailto:sska...@amazon.com.INVALID]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2019 2:24 AM
&g
, April 10, 2019 11:03 AM
> > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: [MXNET 2.0 Wishlist] [DISCUSS] Refine the InferStorageType
> and
> > memory planning pass
> >
> >
> > Thank you Tianqi and Sam for the kind suggestions.
> >
> >
ache.org
> Subject: RE: [MXNET 2.0 Wishlist] [DISCUSS] Refine the InferStorageType and
> memory planning pass
>
>
> Thank you Tianqi and Sam for the kind suggestions.
>
> @Tianqi,
>
> Can you please point me to the code of this pass or do you think anyone
> from TV
@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [MXNET 2.0 Wishlist] [DISCUSS] Refine the InferStorageType and
memory planning pass
I agree with Tianqi. We should let MKLDNN partitipate in memory planning by
first having a separate NNVM pass and then using that info in the regular
memory planning phase.
Its
Hi dev,
As we're discussing the roadmap for MXNet 2.0, I would like to start a thread
about refining the InferStorageType and memory planning pass in MXNet and hope
it can happen as a part of the 2.0 release.
Thanks to @eric-haibin-lin, part of the proposal has already been discussed in
