Skip to content

Add capability to deal with linear without bias (if input Dequant zero-offset is 0)#2

Merged
Victor-Jung merged 1 commit intomainfrom
fc/linear-without-bias
Jun 10, 2025
Merged

Add capability to deal with linear without bias (if input Dequant zero-offset is 0)#2
Victor-Jung merged 1 commit intomainfrom
fc/linear-without-bias

Conversation

@FrancescoConti
Copy link
Member

The current version of DeepQuant simply assumes that all linear modules have a bias, otherwise it skips unifying the Dequant nodes.
This modification enables unification of Dequant blocks even when there is no biasDequantNode.
This implementation is incomplete as it assumes that the input Dequant zeroPoint is 0.

The current version of DeepQuant simply assumes that all linear
modules have a bias, otherwise it skips unifying the Dequant
nodes.
This modification enables unification of Dequant blocks even
when there is no `biasDequantNode`.
This implementation is incomplete as it assumes that the input
Dequant zeroPoint is 0.
@federicobrancasi
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for this contribution! This is definitely a step in the right direction for handling linear layers without bias terms

I agree that the implementation is incomplete regarding zero-point handling (the assumption that input dequant zero-point = 0) and bit-width considerations, but I think this is acceptable for now.

I'm down to merge this as it improves functionality without breaking existing behavior. @Victor-Jung are you in agreement? We can always enhance the zero-point and bitwidth handling in future iterations.

Copy link
Member

@Victor-Jung Victor-Jung left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM and okay for handling zp and bw better in later PRs

@Victor-Jung Victor-Jung merged commit e5edfc7 into main Jun 10, 2025
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants