Depends On D122641
Details
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rG LLVM Github Monorepo
Event Timeline
mlir/lib/Dialect/MemRef/IR/MemRefOps.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
1825 | Calling out the same assumption as the expand shape patch. The strides might not be in the same order as the dimensions. So if this is "unsupported" behavior needs to be verified or called out in the op semantics. | |
1899 | Can we return an actual error message here? |
mlir/lib/Dialect/MemRef/IR/MemRefOps.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
1842 | Same comments as in https://reviews.llvm.org/D122641, with likely a slightly different implementation solving the problem with much lower code complexity. | |
1918 | same here re https://reviews.llvm.org/D122641, use of (generalized) saturated_arith will reduce all this complexity and will turn into a simple reduce 1-liner idiom (or map idiom with capture if we don't have a reduce idiom). |
If I am reading this right, this works for the case where stride are not row-major ordered. If so please add a test for that. Removing my blocker
I am unclear why this landed as there were outstanding unaddressed comments.
Sent a followup cleanup here: https://reviews.llvm.org/D122845
Calling out the same assumption as the expand shape patch. The strides might not be in the same order as the dimensions. So if this is "unsupported" behavior needs to be verified or called out in the op semantics.