This new features enabled to dedicate custom storage inline within operations.
This storage can be used as an alternative to attributes to store data that is
specific to an operation. Attribute can also be stored inside the properties
storage if desired, but any kind of data can be present as well. This offers
a way to store and mutate data without uniquing in the Context like Attribute.
See the OpPropertiesTest.cpp for an example where a struct with a
std::vector<> is attached to an operation and mutated in-place:
struct TestProperties {
int a = -1;
float b = -1.;
std::vector<int64_t> array = {-33};
};
More complex scheme (including reference-counting) are also possible.
The only constraint to enable storing a C++ object as "properties" on an
operation is to implement three functions:
- convert from the candidate object to an Attribute
- convert from the Attribute to the candidate object
- hash the object
Optional the parsing and printing can also be customized with 2 extra
functions.
A new options is introduced to ODS to allow dialects to specify:
let usePropertiesForAttributes = 1;
When set to true, the inherent attributes for all the ops in this dialect
will be using properties instead of being stored alongside discardable
attributes.
The TestDialect showcases this feature.
Another change is that we introduce new APIs on the Operation class
to access separately the inherent attributes from the discardable ones.
We envision deprecating and removing the `getAttr()`, `getAttrsDictionary()`,
and other similar method which don't make the distinction explicit, leading
to an entirely separate namespace for discardable attributes.
Recommit d572cd1b067f after fixing python bindings build.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D141742
This is part of an effort to migrate from llvm::Optional to
std::optional. This patch changes the way mlir-tblgen generates .inc
files, and modifies tests and documentation appropriately. It is a "no
compromises" patch, and doesn't leave the user with an unpleasant mix of
llvm::Optional and std::optional.
A non-trivial change has been made to ControlFlowInterfaces to split one
constructor into two, relating to a build failure on Windows.
See also: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/deprecating-llvm-optional-x-hasvalue-getvalue-getvalueor/63716
Signed-off-by: Ramkumar Ramachandra <r@artagnon.com>
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D138934
The current implementation is quite clunky; OperationName stores either an Identifier
or an AbstractOperation that corresponds to an operation. This has several problems:
* OperationNames created before and after an operation are registered are different
* Accessing the identifier name/dialect/etc. from an OperationName are overly branchy
- they need to dyn_cast a PointerUnion to check the state
This commit refactors this such that we create a single information struct for every
operation name, even operations that aren't registered yet. When an OperationName is
created for an unregistered operation, we only populate the name field. When the
operation is registered, we populate the remaining fields. With this we now have two
new classes: OperationName and RegisteredOperationName. These both point to the
same underlying operation information struct, but only RegisteredOperationName can
assume that the operation is actually registered. This leads to a much cleaner API, and
we can also move some AbstractOperation functionality directly to OperationName.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D114049
Introduce the initial support for operation interfaces in C API and Python
bindings. Interfaces are a key component of MLIR's extensibility and should be
available in bindings to make use of full potential of MLIR.
This initial implementation exposes InferTypeOpInterface all the way to the
Python bindings since it can be later used to simplify the operation
construction methods by inferring their return types instead of requiring the
user to do so. The general infrastructure for binding interfaces is defined and
InferTypeOpInterface can be used as an example for binding other interfaces.
Reviewed By: gysit
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111656
