Add unique method ID

[GregoryComer]

Summary: Add an auto-incremented identifier field to the Method class and pass into BackendInitContext. This allows backends to disambiguated between methods with the same name (two models with a "forward" method, for example).

Differential Revision: D78697798

[pytorch-bot]

🔗 Helpful Links

🧪 See artifacts and rendered test results at hud.pytorch.org/pr/pytorch/executorch/12692

• 📄 Preview Python docs built from this PR

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

❌ 5 New Failures

As of commit 08fa039 with merge base 413dee4 ():

NEW FAILURES - The following jobs have failed:

• Lint / lintrunner / linux-job (gh)
  >>> Lint for runtime/executor/test/method_test.cpp:
• pull / android / run-emulator (gh)
  The process '/usr/bin/sh' failed with exit code 255
• pull / test-eval_llama-mmlu-linux / linux-job (gh)
  RuntimeError: Command docker exec -t dc96d69066c3de4ffabf7c894219e7743bc2498c3c392f9fbd445c548908b4ba /exec failed with exit code 1
• pull / unittest-buck / linux / linux-job (gh)
  runtime/backend/test/backend_interface_update_test.cpp:260:22: error: no matching constructor for initialization of 'executorch::runtime::BackendInitContext'
• pull / unittest-buck / macos / macos-job (gh)
  runtime/backend/test/backend_interface_update_test.cpp:260:22: error: no matching constructor for initialization of 'BackendInitContext'

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

[facebook-github-bot]

This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D78697798

[cccclai]

Is it for weight sharing in xnnpack? Can we use the delegate blob hash instead?

[facebook-github-bot]

This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D78697798

[github-actions]

Looks like this PR hasn't been updated in a while so we're going to go ahead and mark this as Stale.
Feel free to remove the Stale label if you feel this was a mistake.
If you are unable to remove the Stale label please contact a maintainer in order to do so.
If you want the bot to never mark this PR stale again, add the no-stale label.
Stale pull requests will automatically be closed after 30 days of inactivity.

[github-actions]

Looks like this PR hasn't been updated in a while so we're going to go ahead and mark this as Stale.
Feel free to remove the Stale label if you feel this was a mistake.
If you are unable to remove the Stale label please contact a maintainer in order to do so.
If you want the bot to never mark this PR stale again, add the no-stale label.
Stale pull requests will automatically be closed after 30 days of inactivity.