Open
Conversation
Author
|
second commit: renamed variables to be more consistent with new method (removed instance keyword) |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I see no reason for assigning tensor priorities per top memory instance. In my opinion, this adds layers of unnecessary complexity and OOP referencing spaghetti. To me, a tensor's priority should be a global variable that depends on how many times the tensor has been used or will be used by any node mapped to any core.
This change simplifies the tensor priority API from a [top instance: int] dictionary to a simple int.