[ET-VK] Call destructor explicitly when move constructing Value#3148
Closed
SS-JIA wants to merge 2 commits intogh/SS-JIA/39/basefrom
Closed
[ET-VK] Call destructor explicitly when move constructing Value#3148SS-JIA wants to merge 2 commits intogh/SS-JIA/39/basefrom
Value#3148SS-JIA wants to merge 2 commits intogh/SS-JIA/39/basefrom
Conversation
Differential Revision: [D56357187](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D56357187/) [ghstack-poisoned]
🔗 Helpful Links🧪 See artifacts and rendered test results at hud.pytorch.org/pr/pytorch/executorch/3148
Note: Links to docs will display an error until the docs builds have been completed. ✅ No FailuresAs of commit 4eca1f5 with merge base 269b6ad ( This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI and updates every 15 minutes. |
facebook-github-bot
added
the
CLA Signed
Contributor
|
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D56357187 |
This was referenced Apr 19, 2024
…`Value`" ## Context Inspecting code for ATen and ExecuTorch's `Value` classes (e.g. `IValue` and `EValue` respectively) I noticed that the destructor is called [explicitly when move constructing with non-trivial types](https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/blob/main/aten/src/ATen/core/ivalue.h#L409). In practice I don't think calling the destructor explicitly is necessary because move constructing typically sets the moved from object to an inactive state, but since we use `Value` to encapsulate STL types (i.e. types for which we do not implement the destructor) it's best to call the destructor explicitly to be safe. Differential Revision: [D56357187](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D56357187/) [ghstack-poisoned]
Contributor
|
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D56357187 |
junpi3
approved these changes
Apr 19, 2024
Contributor
|
This pull request has been merged in 825db6c. |
Closed
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
3 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.
Stack from ghstack (oldest at bottom):
ParamsBindListto prevent needing to passshared_ptrto bind parameter UBOs #3150Value#3148Context
Inspecting code for ATen and ExecuTorch's
Valueclasses (e.g.IValueandEValuerespectively) I noticed that the destructor is called explicitly when move constructing with non-trivial types. In practice I don't think calling the destructor explicitly is necessary because move constructing typically sets the moved from object to an inactive state, but since we useValueto encapsulate STL types (i.e. types for which we do not implement the destructor) it's best to call the destructor explicitly to be safe.Differential Revision: D56357187