Interfaces #3
Interfaces #3
Conversation
This effectively rewrites Ch.2 to introduce dialects, operations, and registration instead of deferring to Ch.3. This allows for introducing the best practices up front(using ODS, registering operations, etc.), and limits the opaque API to the chapter document instead of the code. PiperOrigin-RevId: 265614997
This effectively rewrites Ch.2 to introduce dialects, operations, and registration instead of deferring to Ch.3. This allows for introducing the best practices up front(using ODS, registering operations, etc.), and limits the opaque API to the chapter document instead of the code. PiperOrigin-RevId: 265614997
…ern match and rewrite.
| class ShapeInferenceInterface | ||
| : public DialectInterfaceCollection<DialectShapeInferenceInterface> { | ||
| public: | ||
| using Base::Base; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could this be written as an OpInterface that is registered on each of the operations?
| >]; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| def GenericCallOp : Toy_Op<"generic_call"> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
To hook into inlining, we will need to add the CallOpInterface to this op. You can look at the Standard call op for an example:
https://github.com/tensorflow/mlir/blob/master/include/mlir/Analysis/CallInterfaces.td
| /// as necessary. | ||
| void handleTerminator(Operation *op, | ||
| ArrayRef<Value *> valuesToRepl) const final { | ||
| // Only "toy.return" needs to be handled here. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We could probably mentioned that "toy.return" is the only terminator in the toy dialect.
| // Analysis Hooks | ||
| //===--------------------------------------------------------------------===// | ||
|
|
||
| bool shouldAnalyzeRecursively(Operation *op) const final { return true; } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This hook doesn't need to be override, this is only necessary on operations with regions.
| void inferShape(Operation *op) { | ||
| // The add operation is trivial: propagate the input type as is. | ||
| if (auto addOp = llvm::dyn_cast<AddOp>(op)) { | ||
| op->getResult(0)->setType(op->getOperand(0)->getType()); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If this is an OpInterface, each of these can be handled directly by the ops themselves.
|
Hey Sana, the inliner pass was just updated upstream to include support for calls from different dialects. This should enable the inlining for toy, with a few tweaks. One thing we will likely need at this point is another pass that deletes all of the non-main functions. We don't have proper modeling for static/internal functions to be able to remove them generically, so we will need to do that in toy. As for the shape inference interface, could we just have this as an OpInterface that gets implemented by the toy operations? Is there a reason why we can't test the shape inference pass via FileCheck? I'm assuming that it should fire if we put it in the pass pipeline. You could just write a .mlir that only has main where all of the shapes are still dynamic and try to run it through toy-ch4. |
|
See new branch op_interface that uses op interface for shape inference
instead.
…On Sat, Oct 5, 2019 at 4:49 PM River Riddle ***@***.***> wrote:
Hey Sana, the inliner pass was just updated upstream to include support
for calls from different dialects. This should enable the inlining for toy,
with a few tweaks. One thing we will likely need at this point is another
pass that deletes all of the non-main functions. We don't have proper
modeling for static/internal functions to be able to remove them
generically, so we will need to do that in toy.
As for the shape inference interface, could we just have this as an
OpInterface that gets implemented by the toy operations? Is there a reason
why we can't test the shape inference pass via FileCheck? I'm assuming that
it should fire if we put it in the pass pipeline. You could just write a
.mlir that only has main where all of the shapes are still dynamic and try
to run it through toy-ch4.
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#3?email_source=notifications&email_token=AFFSCHIQA2GOKKQ2PKXPP5DQND4VFA5CNFSM4I5PEEHKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEAN3PBQ#issuecomment-538687366>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFFSCHNZTAC3YCDL276MG4TQND4VFANCNFSM4I5PEEHA>
.
|
Inliner currently does not work:
doesn't handle generic calls
adding new pass results in build break
Also need feedback on how to test shape inference.