-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15.1k
[mlir-tblgen] Only create body for unpruned create #166019
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
|
Thank you for submitting a Pull Request (PR) to the LLVM Project! This PR will be automatically labeled and the relevant teams will be notified. If you wish to, you can add reviewers by using the "Reviewers" section on this page. If this is not working for you, it is probably because you do not have write permissions for the repository. In which case you can instead tag reviewers by name in a comment by using If you have received no comments on your PR for a week, you can request a review by "ping"ing the PR by adding a comment “Ping”. The common courtesy "ping" rate is once a week. Please remember that you are asking for valuable time from other developers. If you have further questions, they may be answered by the LLVM GitHub User Guide. You can also ask questions in a comment on this PR, on the LLVM Discord or on the forums. |
|
@llvm/pr-subscribers-mlir @llvm/pr-subscribers-mlir-core Author: Hsiang-Chieh Tsou (hsjts0u) ChangesFull diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/166019.diff 1 Files Affected:
diff --git a/mlir/tools/mlir-tblgen/OpDefinitionsGen.cpp b/mlir/tools/mlir-tblgen/OpDefinitionsGen.cpp
index 371864830a3c1..d66abdbaf9e44 100644
--- a/mlir/tools/mlir-tblgen/OpDefinitionsGen.cpp
+++ b/mlir/tools/mlir-tblgen/OpDefinitionsGen.cpp
@@ -2632,11 +2632,13 @@ void OpEmitter::genInlineCreateBody(
interleaveComma(nonBuilderStateArgsList, nonBuilderStateArgsOS);
nonBuilderStateArgs = ", " + nonBuilderStateArgs;
}
- cWithLoc->body() << llvm::formatv(inlineCreateBody, locParamName,
- nonBuilderStateArgs,
- opClass.getClassName());
- cImplicitLoc->body() << llvm::formatv(inlineCreateBodyImplicitLoc,
- nonBuilderStateArgs);
+ if (cWithLoc)
+ cWithLoc->body() << llvm::formatv(inlineCreateBody, locParamName,
+ nonBuilderStateArgs,
+ opClass.getClassName());
+ if (cImplicitLoc)
+ cImplicitLoc->body() << llvm::formatv(inlineCreateBodyImplicitLoc,
+ nonBuilderStateArgs);
}
void OpEmitter::genSeparateArgParamBuilder() {
|
|
@makslevental Could you review this PR or tag the relevant reviewers? Thank you! |
| if (cWithLoc) | ||
| cWithLoc->body() << llvm::formatv(inlineCreateBody, locParamName, | ||
| nonBuilderStateArgs, | ||
| opClass.getClassName()); | ||
| if (cImplicitLoc) | ||
| cImplicitLoc->body() << llvm::formatv(inlineCreateBodyImplicitLoc, | ||
| nonBuilderStateArgs); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't understand - when are these null? when does addStaticMethod return a null?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ah it calls
/// Add a new method if it is not made redundant by any existing methods and
/// prune and existing methods made redundant.
Method *addMethodAndPrune(Method &&newMethod);gotcha
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@hsjts0u one question: is the header (decl) still being generated or is the header also being pruned (sorry I don't remember)...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm honestly not sure, but it looks like the decls and defs are generated at the construction of the OpEmitterClass and the actual emit methods are methods of the class so I assume both are pruned.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok I haven't checked yet but I'll check soon
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
somewhere in here should be fine https://github.com/hsjts0u/llvm-project/blob/main/mlir/test/mlir-tblgen/op-decl-and-defs.td
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I can repro but it is kind of awkward. I hit this https://github.com/hsjts0u/llvm-project/blob/main/mlir/tools/mlir-tblgen/OpDefinitionsGen.cpp#L3121 before I hit the segfault. Something like this would segfault if that line is commented out or the if (body) check is added back.
def ReproOp : NS_Op<"repro", []> {
let arguments = (ins
SymbolNameAttr:$sym_name,
TypeAttrOf<FunctionType>:$function_type,
OptionalAttr<DictArrayAttr>:$arg_attrs,
OptionalAttr<DictArrayAttr>:$res_attrs,
OptionalAttr<UnitAttr>:$unit
);
let regions = (region AnyRegion:$body);
let builders = [
OpBuilder<(ins
"StringRef":$name, "FunctionType":$type,
CArg<"ArrayRef<DictionaryAttr>", "{}">:$argAttrs,
CArg<"ArrayRef<DictionaryAttr>", "{}">:$resultAttrs)
>,
OpBuilder<(ins
"StringRef":$name, "FunctionType":$type)
>];
}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Added back the if (body) statement as it seems to be checking when it is not necessary for it to check. Even the tests that were added with the removal of if (body) still pass when added back.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
okay cool your snippet here led me to be able to repro your segfault so you can revert the change you made in order to add the test (and the test itself) and then i'll merge.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks! Reverted
|
@hsjts0u I ran the tests. I'll also test the PR locally (just to double check). |
|
If you think it is good to go please help me merge. Thanks! |
This reverts commit ade6b77.
makslevental
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for fix (sorry I missed when I added these create builders 😅)
|
@hsjts0u Congratulations on having your first Pull Request (PR) merged into the LLVM Project! Your changes will be combined with recent changes from other authors, then tested by our build bots. If there is a problem with a build, you may receive a report in an email or a comment on this PR. Please check whether problems have been caused by your change specifically, as the builds can include changes from many authors. It is not uncommon for your change to be included in a build that fails due to someone else's changes, or infrastructure issues. How to do this, and the rest of the post-merge process, is covered in detail here. If your change does cause a problem, it may be reverted, or you can revert it yourself. This is a normal part of LLVM development. You can fix your changes and open a new PR to merge them again. If you don't get any reports, no action is required from you. Your changes are working as expected, well done! |
No description provided.