-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14.8k
[mlir][Conversion] FuncToLLVM
: Simplify bare-pointer handling
#96393
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
@llvm/pr-subscribers-mlir @llvm/pr-subscribers-mlir-gpu Author: Matthias Springer (matthias-springer) ChangesBefore this commit, there used to be a workaround in the This commit effectively reverts back to the old implementation (a664c14) and adds additional checks to make sure that bare pointers are used only for function entry block arguments. Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96393.diff 3 Files Affected:
|
@llvm/pr-subscribers-mlir-llvm Author: Matthias Springer (matthias-springer) ChangesBefore this commit, there used to be a workaround in the This commit effectively reverts back to the old implementation (a664c14) and adds additional checks to make sure that bare pointers are used only for function entry block arguments. Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96393.diff 3 Files Affected:
|
9eff486
to
dac6cf3
Compare
f65911a
to
2d83858
Compare
Before this commit, there used to be a workaround in the `func.func`/`gpu.func` op lowering when the bare-pointer calling convention was enabled. This workaround "patched up" the argument materializations for memref arguments. This can be done directly in the argument materialization functions (as the TODOs in the code base indicate).
2d83858
to
0ae7616
Compare
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.
Has anything changed between now and the patch this is reverting that makes this now feasible? The implementation looks to me as though it would have been feasible back then as well
That's right, this implementation would have been feasible back then. My best guess is that the author was confused about I'm thinking of adding a different
But that could be a larger change and I'd rather do that in a separate PR. |
That'd be great! |
…#96393) Before this commit, there used to be a workaround in the `func.func`/`gpu.func` op lowering when the bare-pointer calling convention is enabled. This workaround "patched up" the argument materializations for memref arguments. This can be done directly in the argument materialization functions (as the TODOs in the code base indicate). This commit effectively reverts back to the old implementation (a664c14) and adds additional checks to make sure that bare pointers are used only for function entry block arguments.
Before this commit, there used to be a workaround in the
func.func
/gpu.func
op lowering when the bare-pointer calling convention is enabled. This workaround "patched up" the argument materializations for memref arguments. This can be done directly in the argument materialization functions (as the TODOs in the code base indicate).This commit effectively reverts back to the old implementation (a664c14) and adds additional checks to make sure that bare pointers are used only for function entry block arguments.