Please use GitHub pull requests for new patches. Phabricator shutdown timeline

Differential D114689

[mlir][linalg] Use top down traversal for padding.
ClosedPublic
Actions

Authored by gysit on Nov 28 2021, 11:28 PM.

Details

Reviewers

nicolasvasilache

Commits

rG7f7103cd06b0: [mlir][linalg] Use top down traversal for padding.

Summary

Pad the operation using a top down traversal. The top down traversal unlocks folding opportunities and dim op canonicalizations due to the introduced extract slice operation after the padded operation.

Depends On D114585

Diff Detail

Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo

Event Timeline

gysit created this revision.Nov 28 2021, 11:28 PM

Herald added subscribers: sdasgup3, wenzhicui, wrengr and 21 others. · View Herald TranscriptNov 28 2021, 11:28 PM

gysit requested review of this revision.Nov 28 2021, 11:28 PM

Herald added a reviewer: nicolasvasilache. · View Herald TranscriptNov 28 2021, 11:28 PM

Herald added a project: Restricted Project. · View Herald Transcript

Herald added subscribers: limo1996, stephenneuendorffer, nicolasvasilache. · View Herald Transcript

gysit added a child revision: D114690: [mlir][linalg] Support the empty anchor op string when padding..Nov 28 2021, 11:28 PM

Harbormaster completed remote builds in B136375: Diff 390256.Nov 28 2021, 11:45 PM

nicolasvasilache accepted this revision.Nov 29 2021, 1:29 AM

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Nov 29 2021, 1:29 AM

Closed by commit rG7f7103cd06b0: [mlir][linalg] Use top down traversal for padding. (authored by gysit). · Explain WhyNov 30 2021, 7:31 AM

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.

gysit added a commit: rG7f7103cd06b0: [mlir][linalg] Use top down traversal for padding..

mehdi_amini added inline comments.Nov 30 2021, 9:20 PM

mlir/lib/Dialect/Linalg/Transforms/LinalgStrategyPasses.cpp
144	I have concerns about this: the top down / bottom up is supposed, I believe, to be only a crude heuristic and not something used to control the behavior like it is intended here. The Greedy rewriter is still intended to be a greedy strategy and the comment here has me concerned. Please revert, unless I misunderstood this change.