[FFI][REFACTOR] Phase out getattr based attribute handling #18189
Conversation
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
tqchen
changed the title
tqchen
force-pushed
the
refl-clean
branch
5 times, most recently
from
248a895 to
236f6c9
Compare
This PR phases out getattar based attribute handling as they are slower and introduces extra code path. This does mean that if an Object is not explicitly registered in python side, we will no longer be able to access the field by name. Likely this is also desirable as we would like to enable faster use that updates the python end and do not rely on these behavior.
MasterJH5574
approved these changes
Aug 6, 2025
Member
Author
|
Note for upgrade
|
ShiboXing
pushed a commit
to ShiboXing/tvm
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 10, 2025
) [REFACTOR] Phase out getattr based attribute handling This PR phases out getattar based attribute handling as they are slower and introduces extra code path. This does mean that if an Object is not explicitly registered in python side, we will no longer be able to access the field by name. Likely this is also desirable as we would like to enable faster use that updates the python end and do not rely on these behavior.
tqchen
added a commit
to tqchen/tvm
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 13, 2025
) [REFACTOR] Phase out getattr based attribute handling This PR phases out getattar based attribute handling as they are slower and introduces extra code path. This does mean that if an Object is not explicitly registered in python side, we will no longer be able to access the field by name. Likely this is also desirable as we would like to enable faster use that updates the python end and do not rely on these behavior.
tqchen
added a commit
to tqchen/tvm
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 13, 2025
) [REFACTOR] Phase out getattr based attribute handling This PR phases out getattar based attribute handling as they are slower and introduces extra code path. This does mean that if an Object is not explicitly registered in python side, we will no longer be able to access the field by name. Likely this is also desirable as we would like to enable faster use that updates the python end and do not rely on these behavior.
tqchen
added a commit
to tqchen/tvm
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 13, 2025
) [REFACTOR] Phase out getattr based attribute handling This PR phases out getattar based attribute handling as they are slower and introduces extra code path. This does mean that if an Object is not explicitly registered in python side, we will no longer be able to access the field by name. Likely this is also desirable as we would like to enable faster use that updates the python end and do not rely on these behavior.
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.
This PR phases out getattar based attribute handling as they are slower and introduces extra code path.
This does mean that if an Object is not explicitly registered in python side, we will no longer be able to access the field by name. Likely this is also desirable as we would like to enable faster use that updates the python end and do not rely on these behavior.