input/output spec update of the exported program after graph transformation about executorch HOT 6 CLOSED

Instead of manually updating the graph signature, you can also try wrapping the code that runs the passes with the following context manager, which will automatically update the signature for you

with ep.graph_module._set_replace_hook(ep.graph_signature.get_replace_hook()):
    AddmmToLinearTransform()(ep.graph_module)

Here is an example where we use it: code

But separately, a work item for the executorch team should be to update the passes so that it will do this automatic updating. cc @kimishpatel who wrote the pass

from executorch.

@mhs4670go recently, #3483 was landed that allows backends to specify certain operators to avoid decomposing; this will make it so that the AddmmToLinearTransform() pass is not necessary as aten.linear will never be decomposed in the first place.

To see an example of how it works please take a look at the NonDecompTestPartitioner in op_partitioner_demo.py. I would recommend going this route instead of using the linear recomposition pass. Please try it out!

cc: @tarun292

from executorch.

@mhs4670go What backend serialization process are you trying to lower the graph to? Is it Vulkan?

from executorch.

@guangy10 Ah, it's internal backend of my company. The graph IR follows this schema. Technically speaking, when the outputs are registered in the circle graph, it refers to the name of the output spec in the exported program, which is addmm. But the name of the created linear op in the transformation is aten_linear_default. Then, there is mismatch between them.

So, I think there are two options for this case.

1. Update the output spec of the exported program after the transformation.
2. Set the name of the linear op to the name of the existing addmm operator during transformation.

constant_prop_pass updates the input spec according to the propagation. But replace_addmm_mm_with_linear doesn't update the spec. So, I wonder that I should manually update the spec.

from executorch.

@SS-JIA @angelayi Thanks for the helps! Both way are very helpful for me.

from executorch.

_set_replace_hook

I did not know about that magic context manager. Yeah when I wrote that pass, I definitely missed this case, but also it was a long time ago so I dont know if we even had graph signature. Will follow up on updating the pass, but I wont be surprised if I forget about it. lol.

from executorch.