* Don't call raw_string_ostream::flush(), which is essentially a no-op
* Strip unneeded calls to raw_string_ostream::str(), to avoid excess indirection.
This helps support generic manipulation of operations that don't (yet)
use properties to store inherent attributes.
Use this mechanism in type inference and operation equivalence.
Note that only minimal unit tests are introduced as all the upstream
dialects seem to have been updated to use properties and the
non-property behavior is essentially deprecated and untested.
The change in c1eab57673ef3eb2842c0fbe454d7878854cf54c fixed the
behavior of `getDiscardableAttrDictionary` for ops that are not using
properties to only return discardable attributes. AsmPrinter was relying
on the wrong behavior when printing such ops in the generic form,
assuming all attributes are discardable.
When properties are not enabled in an operation, inherent attributes are
stored in the common dictionary with discardable attributes. However,
`getDiscardableAttrs` and `getDiscardableAttrDictionary` were returning
the entire dictionary, making the caller mistakenly believe that all
inherent attributes are discardable. Fix this by filtering out
attributes whose names are registered with the operation, i.e., inherent
attributes. This requires an API change so `getDiscardableAttrs` returns
a filter range.
This is a follow-up to 8c2bff1ab929 which lazy-initialized the
diagnostic and removed the need to dynamically abandon() an
InFlightDiagnostic. This further simplifies the code to not needed to
return a reference to an InFlightDiagnostic and instead eagerly emit
errors.
Also use `emitError` as name instead of `getDiag` which seems more
explicit and in-line with the common usage.
Add capabilities for comparing opaque properties. This is useful when
dealing with arbitrary operations which can be compare based on their
OperationName. Now you can furthermore compare their properties without
the need to determine their actual type.
The operand_segment_sizes and result_segment_sizes Attributes are now inlined
in the operation as native propertie. We continue to support building an
Attribute on the fly for `getAttr("operand_segment_sizes")` and setting the
property from an attribute with `setAttr("operand_segment_sizes", attr)`.
A new bytecode version is introduced to support backward compatibility and
backdeployments.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D155919
The operand_segment_sizes and result_segment_sizes Attributes are now inlined
in the operation as native propertie. We continue to support building an
Attribute on the fly for `getAttr("operand_segment_sizes")` and setting the
property from an attribute with `setAttr("operand_segment_sizes", attr)`.
A new bytecode version is introduced to support backward compatibility and
backdeployments.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D155919
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 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.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D141742
