From https://reviews.llvm.org/D153245
This adds support for native PDL (and PDLL) C++ constraints to return
results.
This is useful for situations where a pattern checks for certain
constraints of multiple interdependent attributes and computes a new
attribute value based on them. Currently, for such an example it is
required to escape to C++ during matching to perform the check and after
a successful match again escape to native C++ to perform the computation
during the rewriting part of the pattern. With this work we can do the
computation in C++ during matching and use the result in the rewriting
part of the pattern. Effectively this enables a choice in the trade-off
of memory consumption during matching vs recomputation of values.
This is an example of a situation where this is useful: We have two
operations with certain attributes that have interdependent constraints.
For instance `attr_foo: one_of [0, 2, 4, 8], attr_bar: one_of [0, 2, 4,
8]` and `attr_foo == attr_bar`. The pattern should only match if all
conditions are true. The new operation should be created with a new
attribute which is computed from the two matched attributes e.g.
`attr_baz = attr_foo * attr_bar`. For the check we already escape to
native C++ and have all values at hand so it makes sense to directly
compute the new attribute value as well:
```
Constraint checkAndCompute(attr0: Attr, attr1: Attr) -> Attr;
Pattern example with benefit(1) {
let foo = op<test.foo>() {attr = attr_foo : Attr};
let bar = op<test.bar>(foo) {attr = attr_bar : Attr};
let attr_baz = checkAndCompute(attr_foo, attr_bar);
rewrite bar with {
let baz = op<test.baz> {attr=attr_baz};
replace bar with baz;
};
}
```
To achieve this the following notable changes were necessary:
PDLL:
- Remove check in PDLL parser that prevented native constraints from
returning results
PDL:
- Change PDL definition of pdl.apply_native_constraint to allow variadic
results
PDL_interp:
- Change PDL_interp definition of pdl_interp.apply_constraint to allow
variadic results
PDLToPDLInterp Pass:
The input to the pass is an arbitrary number of PDL patterns. The pass
collects the predicates that are required to match all of the pdl
patterns and establishes an ordering that allows creation of a single
efficient matcher function to match all of them. Values that are matched
and possibly used in the rewriting part of a pattern are represented as
positions. This allows fusion and thus reusing a single position for
multiple matching patterns. Accordingly, we introduce
ConstraintPosition, which records the type and index of the result of
the constraint. The problem is for the corresponding value to be used in
the rewriting part of a pattern it has to be an input to the
pdl_interp.record_match operation, which is generated early during the
pass such that its surrounding block can be referred to by branching
operations. In consequence the value has to be materialized after the
original pdl.apply_native_constraint has been deleted but before we get
the chance to generate the corresponding pdl_interp.apply_constraint
operation. We solve this by emitting a placeholder value when a
ConstraintPosition is evaluated. These placeholder values (due to fusion
there may be multiple for one constraint result) are replaced later when
the actual pdl_interp.apply_constraint operation is created.
Changes since the phabricator review:
- Addressed all comments
- In particular, removed registerConstraintFunctionWithResults and
instead changed registerConstraintFunction so that contraint functions
always have results (empty by default)
- Thus we don't need to reuse `rewriteFunctions` to store constraint
functions with results anymore, and can instead use
`constraintFunctions`
- Perform a stable sort of ConstraintQuestion, so that
ConstraintQuestion appear before other ConstraintQuestion that use their
results.
- Don't create placeholders for pdl_interp::ApplyConstraintOp. Instead
generate the `pdl_interp::ApplyConstraintOp` before generating the
successor block.
- Fixed a test failure in the pdl python bindings
Original code by @martin-luecke
Co-authored-by: martin-luecke <martinpaul.luecke@amd.com>
This renaming started with the native ODS support for properties, this is completing it.
A mass automated textual rename seems safe for most codebases.
Drop also the ods prefix to keep the accessors the same as they were before
this change:
properties.odsOperandSegmentSizes
reverts back to:
properties.operandSegementSizes
The ODS prefix was creating divergence between all the places and make it harder to
be consistent.
Reviewed By: jpienaar
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D157173
This is generated by running
```
sed --in-place 's/[[:space:]]\+$//' mlir/**/*.td
sed --in-place 's/[[:space:]]\+$//' mlir/**/*.mlir
```
Reviewed By: rriddle, dcaballe
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D138866
This commit adds support for building a concatenated range from
a given set of elements, either single element or other ranges, within a
rewrite. We could conceptually extend this to support constraining
input ranges, but the logic there is quite a bit more complex so it is
left for later work when a need arises.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D133719
This reland includes changes to the Python bindings.
Switch variadic operand and result segment size attributes to use the
dense i32 array. Dense integer arrays were introduced primarily to
represent index lists. They are a better fit for segment sizes than
dense elements attrs.
Depends on D131801
Reviewed By: rriddle
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D131803
Switch variadic operand and result segment size attributes to use the
dense i32 array. Dense integer arrays were introduced primarily to
represent index lists. They are a better fit for segment sizes than
dense elements attrs.
Depends on D131738
Reviewed By: mehdi_amini
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D131702
The current implementation uses a discrete "pdl_interp.inferred_types"
operation, which acts as a "fake" handle to a type range. This op is
used as a signal to pdl_interp.create_operation that types should be
inferred. This is terribly awkward and clunky though:
* This op doesn't have a byte code representation, and its conversion
to bytecode kind of assumes that it is only used in a certain way. The
current lowering is also broken and seemingly untested.
* Given that this is a different operation, it gives off the assumption
that it can be used multiple times, or that after the first use
the value contains the inferred types. This isn't the case though,
the resultant type range can never actually be used as a type range.
This commit refactors the representation by removing the discrete
InferredTypesOp, and instead adds a UnitAttr to
pdl_interp.CreateOperation that signals when the created operations
should infer their types. This leads to a much much cleaner abstraction,
a more optimal bytecode lowering, and also allows for better error
handling and diagnostics when a created operation doesn't actually
support type inferrence.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D124587
This commit refactors the expected form of native constraint and rewrite
functions, and greatly reduces the necessary user complexity required when
defining a native function. Namely, this commit adds in automatic processing
of the necessary PDLValue glue code, and allows for users to define
constraint/rewrite functions using the C++ types that they actually want to
use.
As an example, lets see a simple example rewrite defined today:
```
static void rewriteFn(PatternRewriter &rewriter, PDLResultList &results,
ArrayRef<PDLValue> args) {
ValueRange operandValues = args[0].cast<ValueRange>();
TypeRange typeValues = args[1].cast<TypeRange>();
...
// Create an operation at some point and pass it back to PDL.
Operation *op = rewriter.create<SomeOp>(...);
results.push_back(op);
}
```
After this commit, that same rewrite could be defined as:
```
static Operation *rewriteFn(PatternRewriter &rewriter ValueRange operandValues,
TypeRange typeValues) {
...
// Create an operation at some point and pass it back to PDL.
return rewriter.create<SomeOp>(...);
}
```
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D122086
This support has never really worked well, and is incredibly clunky to
use (it effectively creates two argument APIs), and clunky to generate (it isn't
clear how we should actually expose this from PDL frontends). Treating these
as just attribute arguments is much much cleaner in every aspect of the stack.
If we need to optimize lots of constant parameters, it would be better to
investigate internal representation optimizations (e.g. batch attribute creation),
that do not affect the user (we want a clean external API).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D121569
Defining our own function operation allows for the PDL interpreter
to be more self contained, and also removes any dependency on FuncOp;
which is moving out of the Builtin dialect.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D121253
This is commit 2 of 4 for the multi-root matching in PDL, discussed in https://llvm.discourse.group/t/rfc-multi-root-pdl-patterns-for-kernel-matching/4148 (topic flagged for review).
This commit implements the features needed for the execution of the new operations pdl_interp.get_accepting_ops, pdl_interp.choose_op:
1. The implementation of the generation and execution of the two ops.
2. The addition of Stack of bytecode positions within the ByteCodeExecutor. This is needed because in pdl_interp.choose_op, we iterate over the values returned by pdl_interp.get_accepting_ops until we reach finalize. When we reach finalize, we need to return back to the position marked in the stack.
3. The functionality to extend the lifetime of values that cross the nondeterministic choice. The existing bytecode generator allocates the values to memory positions by representing the liveness of values as a collection of disjoint intervals over the matcher positions. This is akin to register allocation, and substantially reduces the footprint of the bytecode executor. However, because with iterative operation pdl_interp.choose_op, execution "returns" back, so any values whose original liveness cross the nondeterminstic choice must have their lifetime executed until finalize.
Testing: pdl-bytecode.mlir test
Reviewed By: rriddle, Mogball
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D108547
Supporting ranges in the byte code requires additional complexity, given that a range can't be easily representable as an opaque void *, as is possible with the existing bytecode value types (Attribute, Type, Value, etc.). To enable representing a range with void *, an auxillary storage is used for the actual range itself, with the pointer being passed around in the normal byte code memory. For type ranges, a TypeRange is stored. For value ranges, a ValueRange is stored. The above problem represents a majority of the complexity involved in this revision, the rest is adapting/adding byte code operations to support the changes made to the PDL interpreter in the parent revision.
After this revision, PDL will have initial end-to-end support for variadic operands/results.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D95723
This revision extends the PDL Interpreter dialect to add support for variadic operands and results, with ranges of these values represented via the recently added !pdl.range type. To support this extension, three new operations have been added that closely match the single variant:
* pdl_interp.check_types : Compare a range of types with a known range.
* pdl_interp.create_types : Create a constant range of types.
* pdl_interp.get_operands : Get a range of operands from an operation.
* pdl_interp.get_results : Get a range of results from an operation.
* pdl_interp.switch_types : Switch on a range of types.
This revision handles adding support in the interpreter dialect and the conversion from PDL to PDLInterp. Support for variadic operands and results in the bytecode will be added in a followup revision.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D95722
This has a numerous amount of benefits, given the overly clunky nature of CreateNativeOp:
* Users can now call into arbitrary rewrite functions from inside of PDL, allowing for more natural interleaving of PDL/C++ and enabling for more of the pattern to be in PDL.
* Removes the need for an additional set of C++ functions/registry/etc. The new ApplyNativeRewriteOp will use the same PDLRewriteFunction as the existing RewriteOp. This reduces the API surface area exposed to users.
This revision also introduces a new PDLResultList class. This class is used to provide results of native rewrite functions back to PDL. We introduce a new class instead of using a SmallVector to simplify the work necessary for variadics, given that ranges will require some changes to the structure of PDLValue.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D95720
PDL patterns are now supported via a new `PDLPatternModule` class. This class contains a ModuleOp with the pdl::PatternOp operations representing the patterns, as well as a collection of registered C++ functions for native constraints/creations/rewrites/etc. that may be invoked via the pdl patterns. Instances of this class are added to an OwningRewritePatternList in the same fashion as C++ RewritePatterns, i.e. via the `insert` method.
The PDL bytecode is an in-memory representation of the PDL interpreter dialect that can be efficiently interpreted/executed. The representation of the bytecode boils down to a code array(for opcodes/memory locations/etc) and a memory buffer(for storing attributes/operations/values/any other data necessary). The bytecode operations are effectively a 1-1 mapping to the PDLInterp dialect operations, with a few exceptions in cases where the in-memory representation of the bytecode can be more efficient than the MLIR representation. For example, a generic `AreEqual` bytecode op can be used to represent AreEqualOp, CheckAttributeOp, and CheckTypeOp.
The execution of the bytecode is split into two phases: matching and rewriting. When matching, all of the matched patterns are collected to avoid the overhead of re-running parts of the matcher. These matched patterns are then considered alongside the native C++ patterns, which rewrite immediately in-place via `RewritePattern::matchAndRewrite`, for the given root operation. When a PDL pattern is matched and has the highest benefit, it is passed back to the bytecode to execute its rewriter.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D89107
