Updates:
1. Infer lvlToDim from dimToLvl
2. Add more tests for block sparsity
3. Finish TODOs related to lvlToDim, including adding lvlToDim to python
binding
Verification of lvlToDim that user provides will be implemented in the
next PR.
In the new syntax, we will parse **loose_compressed** as
**CompressedWithHigh** and **block2_4** as **TwoOutOfFour** level
format. Currently, we support unique and order as level properties.
Replaced the "NEW_SYNTAX" with the more readable "map"
(which we may, or may not keep). Minor improvement in
keyword parsing, migrated a few more examples over.
Reviewed By: Peiming, yinying-lisa-li
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D158325
Improves the conversion from `DimLvlMap` to STEA, in order to correct rank-mismatch issues in the roundtrip tests.
Reviewed By: aartbik
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D157162
(1) uses the previously introduce API to reuse AffineExpr parser without codedup
(2) solves the look-ahead problem when parsing level spec
Reviewed By: Peiming
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D154254
We are in the progress of migrating to a much improved surface syntax for the Sparse Tensor Encoding Attribute (STEA).
You can see a preview of this in the StableHLO RFC at
https://github.com/openxla/stablehlo/blob/main/rfcs/20230210-sparsity.md
//**This design is courtesy Wren Romano.**//
This initial revision
(1) Introduces the first version of a new parser written by Wren Romano
(2) Introduces a simple "migration plan" using NEW_SYNTAX on the STEA, which will allow us to test the new parser with new examples, as well as migrate existing examples over without the need to rewrite them all
This first "drop" merely provides the entry points to parse the new syntax. The parser is still under active development. For example, we need to address the "lookahead" issue when parsing the lvl spec (viz. do we see l0 = d0 or a direct d0). Another larger task is to actually implement "affine" parsing (since the MLIR affine parser is not accessible in other parts of the tree).
EXAMPLE:
Currently, CSR looks like
#CSR = #sparse_tensor.encoding<{
lvlTypes = ["dense","compressed"],
dimToLvl = affine_map<(i,j) -> (i,j)>
}>
but you can "force" the new parser with
#CSR = #sparse_tensor.encoding<{
NEW_SYNTAX =
(d0, d1) -> (l0 = d0 : dense, l1 = d1 : compressed)
}>
Reviewed By: Peiming
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D153997
This is a major step along the way towards the new STEA design. While a great deal of this patch is simple renaming, there are several significant changes as well. I've done my best to ensure that this patch retains the previous behavior and error-conditions, even though those are at odds with the eventual intended semantics of the `dimToLvl` mapping. Since the majority of the compiler does not yet support non-permutations, I've also added explicit assertions in places that previously had implicitly assumed it was dealing with permutations.
Reviewed By: aartbik
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D151505
This commit is part of the migration of towards the new STEA syntax/design. In particular, this commit includes the following changes:
* Renaming compiler-internal functions/methods:
* `SparseTensorEncodingAttr::{getDimLevelType => getLvlTypes}`
* `Merger::{getDimLevelType => getLvlType}` (for consistency)
* `sparse_tensor::{getDimLevelType => buildLevelType}` (to help reduce confusion vs actual getter methods)
* Renaming external facets to match:
* the STEA parser and printer
* the C and Python bindings
* PyTACO
However, the actual renaming of the `DimLevelType` itself (along with all the "dlt" names) will be handled in a separate commit.
Reviewed By: aartbik
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D150330
`compressed(hi)` is similar to `compressed`, but instead of reusing the previous position high as the current position low, it uses a pair of positions for each sparse index.
The patch only introduces the definition (syntax) but does not provide codegen implementation.
Reviewed By: aartbik
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D148664
The old "pointer/index" names often cause confusion since these names clash with names of unrelated things in MLIR; so this change rectifies this by changing everything to use "position/coordinate" terminology instead.
In addition to the basic terminology, there have also been various conventions for making certain distinctions like: (1) the overall storage for coordinates in the sparse-tensor, vs the particular collection of coordinates of a given element; and (2) particular coordinates given as a `Value` or `TypedValue<MemRefType>`, vs particular coordinates given as `ValueRange` or similar. I have striven to maintain these distinctions
as follows:
* "p/c" are used for individual position/coordinate values, when there is no risk of confusion. (Just like we use "d/l" to abbreviate "dim/lvl".)
* "pos/crd" are used for individual position/coordinate values, when a longer name is helpful to avoid ambiguity or to form compound names (e.g., "parentPos"). (Just like we use "dim/lvl" when we need a longer form of "d/l".)
I have also used these forms for a handful of compound names where the old name had been using a three-letter form previously, even though a longer form would be more appropriate. I've avoided renaming these to use a longer form purely for expediency sake, since changing them would require a cascade of other renamings. They should be updated to follow the new naming scheme, but that can be done in future patches.
* "coords" is used for the complete collection of crd values associated with a single element. In the runtime library this includes both `std::vector` and raw pointer representations. In the compiler, this is used specifically for buffer variables with C++ type `Value`, `TypedValue<MemRefType>`, etc.
The bare form "coords" is discouraged, since it fails to make the dim/lvl distinction; so the compound names "dimCoords/lvlCoords" should be used instead. (Though there may exist a rare few cases where is is appropriate to be intentionally ambiguous about what coordinate-space the coords live in; in which case the bare "coords" is appropriate.)
There is seldom the need for the pos variant of this notion. In most circumstances we use the term "cursor", since the same buffer is reused for a 'moving' pos-collection.
* "dcvs/lcvs" is used in the compiler as the `ValueRange` analogue of "dimCoords/lvlCoords". (The "vs" stands for "`Value`s".) I haven't found the need for it, but "pvs" would be the obvious name for a pos-`ValueRange`.
The old "ind"-vs-"ivs" naming scheme does not seem to have been sustained in more recent code, which instead prefers other mnemonics (e.g., adding "Buf" to the end of the names for `TypeValue<MemRefType>`). I have cleaned up a lot of these to follow the "coords"-vs-"cvs" naming scheme, though haven't done an exhaustive cleanup.
* "positions/coordinates" are used for larger collections of pos/crd values; in particular, these are used when referring to the complete sparse-tensor storage components.
I also prefer to use these unabbreviated names in the documentation, unless there is some specific reason why using the abbreviated forms helps resolve ambiguity.
In addition to making this terminology change, this change also does some cleanup along the way:
* correcting the dim/lvl terminology in certain places.
* adding `const` when it requires no other code changes.
* miscellaneous cleanup that was entailed in order to make the proper distinctions. Most of these are in CodegenUtils.{h,cpp}
Reviewed By: aartbik
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D144773
This extension to the sparse tensor type system in MLIR
opens up a whole new set of sparse storage schemes, such as
block sparse storage (e.g. BCSR) and ELL (aka jagged diagonals).
This revision merely introduces the type extension and
initial documentation. The actual interpretation of the type
(reading in tensors, lowering to code, etc.) will follow.
Reviewed By: Peiming
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D135206
We recently removed the singleton dimension level type (see the revision
https://reviews.llvm.org/D131002) since it was unimplemented but also
incomplete (properties were missing). This revision add singleton back as
extra dimension level type, together with properties ordered/not-ordered
and unique/not-unique. Even though still not lowered to actual code, this
provides a complete way of defining many more sparse storage schemes (in
the long run, we want to support even dimension level types and properties
using the additional extensions proposed in [Chou]).
Note that the current solution of using suffixes for the properties is not
ideal, but keeps the extension relatively simple with respect to parsing and
printing. Furthermore, it is rather consistent with the TACO implementation
which uses things like Compressed-Unique as well. Nevertheless, we probably
want to separate dimension level types from properties when we add more types
and properties.
Reviewed By: Peiming
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D132897
This change omits default values from the sparse tensor type,
saving considerable text real estate for the common cases.
Reviewed By: Peiming
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D132083
A very elaborate, but also very fun revision because all
puzzle pieces are finally "falling in place".
1. replaces lingalg annotations + flags with proper sparse tensor types
2. add rigorous verification on sparse tensor type and sparse primitives
3. removes glue and clutter on opaque pointers in favor of sparse tensor types
4. migrates all tests to use sparse tensor types
NOTE: next CL will remove *all* obsoleted sparse code in Linalg
Reviewed By: bixia
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D102095
(1) migrates the encoding from TensorDialect into the new SparseTensorDialect
(2) replaces dictionary-based storage and builders with struct-like data
Reviewed By: mehdi_amini
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D101669
