Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 17, 2023. It is now read-only.

Add im2col and col2im operator #16502

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Dec 18, 2019
Merged

Add im2col and col2im operator #16502

merged 10 commits into from
Dec 18, 2019

Conversation

arcadiaphy
Copy link
Member

Description

This PR exposes im2col and col2im operator using the functions in im2col.h and im2col.cuh.

#10394

Checklist

Essentials

Please feel free to remove inapplicable items for your PR.

  • The PR title starts with [MXNET-$JIRA_ID], where $JIRA_ID refers to the relevant JIRA issue created (except PRs with tiny changes)
  • Changes are complete (i.e. I finished coding on this PR)
  • All changes have test coverage:
  • Unit tests are added for small changes to verify correctness (e.g. adding a new operator)
  • Nightly tests are added for complicated/long-running ones (e.g. changing distributed kvstore)
  • Build tests will be added for build configuration changes (e.g. adding a new build option with NCCL)
  • Code is well-documented:
  • For user-facing API changes, API doc string has been updated.
  • For new C++ functions in header files, their functionalities and arguments are documented.
  • For new examples, README.md is added to explain the what the example does, the source of the dataset, expected performance on test set and reference to the original paper if applicable
  • Check the API doc at https://mxnet-ci-doc.s3-accelerate.dualstack.amazonaws.com/PR-$PR_ID/$BUILD_ID/index.html
  • To the my best knowledge, examples are either not affected by this change, or have been fixed to be compatible with this change

Changes

  • Feature1, tests, (and when applicable, API doc)
  • Feature2, tests, (and when applicable, API doc)

Comments

  • If this change is a backward incompatible change, why must this change be made.
  • Interesting edge cases to note here

Copy link
Member

@wkcn wkcn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you for the great contribution!

I think it is necessary to check req == kWriteTo or kInplace in the forward function.

Shape3(col_shape[0], col_shape[1], col_shape[2]), s);

for (index_t n = 0; n < num; ++n) {
im2col(s, im[n].dptr_, im_shape, col_buffer_shape,
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could we need to check req == kWriteTo or kInplace?

for (index_t n = 0; n < num; ++n) {
col2im(s, col[n].dptr_, im_shape, col_buffer_shape,
param.kernel, param.pad, param.stride, param.dilate,
im[n].dptr_, kWriteTo);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Replace kWriteTo with req[0] ?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

All fixed. Req types are checked in forward function, too.

Copy link
Member

@wkcn wkcn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Great work. LGTM. Thank you : )

@arcadiaphy arcadiaphy merged commit faa2832 into apache:master Dec 18, 2019
@arcadiaphy arcadiaphy deleted the pr_im2col branch December 18, 2019 02:57
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants