[res] Add GRU in CircleSchema

[BalyshevArtem]

This pr adds CirGru operation in circle_schema.fbs

for issue: #12320
from draft: #12319

ONE-DCO-1.0-Signed-off-by: Artem Balyshev [email protected]

[seanshpark]

Can you move this above BCQGatherOptions ?

[BalyshevArtem]

Done

[hseok-oh]

Do you have any reason to use Gru, not GRU?
I recommended GRU because it is comes from abbreviation (Gated Recurrent Unit), such as RNN, LSTM (RNNOptions, LSTMOptions).

[glistening]

In addition, it is the 1st operation which has the prefix Cir. Do we need this prefix?

[BalyshevArtem]

In addition, it is the 1st operation which has the prefix Cir. Do we need this prefix?

@glistening, @hseok-oh
In this comment #12320 (comment) we discussed the reason for this decision. The main reason is to avoid conflict with tflite naming in future. I think it is good idea to emphasize that this is a circle operation.

Do you have any reason to use Gru, not GRU?

I can change CirGru to CirGRU, for it is okay both variants, If @seanshpark doesn't mind :)

[seanshpark]

CirGru to CirGRU

OK with me :)

[BalyshevArtem]

CirGru to CirGRU

OK with me :)

Done)

[seanshpark]

LGTM thank you!

[glistening]

@BalyshevArtem

@glistening, @hseok-oh In this comment #12320 (comment) we discussed the reason for this decision.

Basically @hseok-oh and I are working for runtime. I (and perhaps @hseok-oh) usually don't see CompilerFE issues and PRs. I see this PR because it is about schema (which is common to compiler and runtime).

The main reason is to avoid conflict with tflite naming in future. I think it is good idea to emphasize that this is a circle operation.

I don't think we need to add prefix Cir to GRU:

1. tflite has not provided GRU, and it is not likely to happen in my opinion. (GRU is old-fashined op, ...)
2. It is circle schema, we don't need to add Cir.

But I don't want to block this PR. It may be merged if it gets @hseok-oh's approval.
(For your information, @hseok-oh is off this week.)

[seanshpark]

@BalyshevArtem , as we are adding new Op in current 0.7 version with some circumstances that there is no particular users (other tools or repos), and behind this, frontend has to do some laborious tasks to provide new mio-circleXX module and related changes.

But recently our internal repo released a package with 0.7 schema.

So, we have to upgrade the version to 0.8 to follow versioning rules.
Can you please add to new schema file in res folder?

If your tasks don't have direct relation with mio-circleXX module, then you can skip adding mio-circle08. I'll handle related tasks after new schema lands.

[BalyshevArtem]

I don't think we need to add prefix Cir to GRU:

@seanshpark,
What do you think about removing Cir prefix? For me both variants are ok)

[seanshpark]

What do you think about removing Cir prefix?

I don't have strong thoughts to keep Cir prefix :), it was a choice to reduce the changes when the time comes. As @hseok-oh wrote, we can rename for tflite Op when it's introduced as GRU_TFLITE or any variants.

[BalyshevArtem]

Can you please add to new schema file in res folder?

Created 0.8 file in res folder and update GRU naming: CirGRU -> GRU

[seanshpark]

LGTM thank you!

[hseok-oh]

LGTM. Thanks.