When compiling for GCC 8.x (< 8.4), SFINAE is disabled for
iterator_range constructor causing ambiguous resolution to construct an
OperandRange from a MutableOperatorRange, even in the presence of a
static_cast<OperatorRange>. This adds an explicit conversion method to
lift the ambiguity.
Tested with a full MLIR build with GCC 8.3.
In line with #66515, change `MutableArrayRange::begin`/`end` to
enumerate `OpOperand &` instead of `Value`. Also remove
`ForOp::getIterOpOperands`/`setIterArg`, which are now redundant.
Note: `MutableOperandRange` cannot be made a derived class of
`indexed_accessor_range_base` (like `OperandRange`), because
`MutableOperandRange::assign` can change the number of operands in the
range.
This new interface allows operations to implement custom handling of ownership values and insertion of dealloc operations which is useful when an op cannot implement the interfaces supported by default by the buffer deallocation pass (e.g., because they are not exactly compatible or because there are some additional semantics to it that would render the default implementations in buffer deallocation invalid, or because no interfaces exist for this
kind of behavior and it's not worth introducing one plus a default implementation in buffer deallocation). Additionally, it can also be used to provide more efficient handling for a specific op than the interface based default
implementations can.
This reverts commit 29d86175e6a5fe956147734229dca88822415b21.
This caused problems in downstream projects. We are reverting to give
them more time for integration.
This new interface allows operations to implement custom handling of ownership
values and insertion of dealloc operations which is useful when an op cannot
implement the interfaces supported by default by the buffer deallocation pass
(e.g., because they are not exactly compatible or because there are some
additional semantics to it that would render the default implementations in
buffer deallocation invalid, or because no interfaces exist for this kind of
behavior and it's not worth introducing one plus a default implementation in
buffer deallocation). Additionally, it can also be used to provide more
efficient handling for a specific op than the interface based default
implementations can.
Reviewed By: springerm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D158756
