Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Rationalize .quantize vs .quantized_model() #2698

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

mikekgfb
Copy link

Summary:
Rationalize .quantize vs .quantized_model()
Let's keep one name for quanthandler functions?

Differential Revision: D55395844

Summary:
Rationalize .quantize vs .quantized_model()
Let's keep one name for quanthandler functions?

Differential Revision: D55395844
Copy link

pytorch-bot bot commented Mar 26, 2024

🔗 Helpful Links

🧪 See artifacts and rendered test results at hud.pytorch.org/pr/pytorch/executorch/2698

Note: Links to docs will display an error until the docs builds have been completed.

❗ 1 Active SEVs

There are 1 currently active SEVs. If your PR is affected, please view them below:

✅ No Failures

As of commit 1d1cb23 with merge base 253f2fa (image):
💚 Looks good so far! There are no failures yet. 💚

This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI and updates every 15 minutes.

@facebook-github-bot facebook-github-bot added the CLA Signed This label is managed by the Facebook bot. Authors need to sign the CLA before a PR can be reviewed. label Mar 26, 2024
@facebook-github-bot
Copy link
Contributor

This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D55395844

@mikekgfb
Copy link
Author

Abandon and defer to a future more comprehensive update.

@mikekgfb mikekgfb closed this Mar 27, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
CLA Signed This label is managed by the Facebook bot. Authors need to sign the CLA before a PR can be reviewed. fb-exported
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants