[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       llvm-bugs
Subject:    [llvm-bugs] [Bug 90680] Bug or insufficient utility in `transform.structured.split` op
From:       LLVM Bugs via llvm-bugs <llvm-bugs () lists ! llvm ! org>
Date:       2024-04-30 22:46:41
Message-ID: 20240430224641.74467710d7142ea1 () email ! llvm ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (text/html)]

<table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="8">
    <tr>
        <th>Issue</th>
        <td>
            <a href=https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/90680>90680</a>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <th>Summary</th>
        <td>
            Bug or insufficient utility in `transform.structured.split` op
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
      <th>Labels</th>
      <td>
      </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
      <th>Assignees</th>
      <td>
      </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
      <th>Reporter</th>
      <td>
          srcarroll
      </td>
    </tr>
</table>

<pre>
    First of all I&apos;ve identified an inconsistency in the way static and dynamic \
split points are handled.  basically, no matter what in the static case, a single \
split point is provided and works no matter how many target payloads there are (see \
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/mlir/lib/Dialect/Linalg/TransformOps/LinalgTransformOps.cpp#L2208). \
Whereas with the dynamic case, the number of split points is determined by the number \
of payloads of the dynamic split point operand (see \
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/mlir/lib/Dialect/Linalg/TransformOps/LinalgTransformOps.cpp#L2208). \
but then the number of split points is compared to the number of target payloads \
(https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/mlir/lib/Dialect/Linalg/TransformOps/LinalgTransformOps.cpp#L2200). \


I can&apos;t quite put my finger on it, but this seems wrong to me. For example, \
consider the edge case where there are no target payloads.  In this case the static \
doesn&apos;t throw any definite failures while the dynamic case does.  I think at the \
very least, there should be consistency here. but the question is, which one do we go \
with.  I actually prefer how the static case works for this. because otherwise we \
would have to know that a payload is present to be able to use the op in the first \
place, which i don&apos;t think is very useful.

I was working on a patch for this to handle some case i needed. but then i realized \
that there was this discrepancy between the number of split point payloads and number \
of target payloads. I admit I&apos;m a little confused about what the relationship \
between these two things should actually be.  But I&apos;m almost certain they \
shouldn&apos;t necessarily be the same size. </pre>
<img width="1px" height="1px" alt="" \
src="http://email.email.llvm.org/o/eJzMVUFv40YP_TXyhfgEWbGt5ODD7hcYCLBALwV6pjSUxGY0ox1 \
yonp_fTEj23FStEVvm0MEjDnk4-PjGxThwREdi_3XYv-8waijD0cJHYbgrd203pyPJw6i4HtAa-GlqJs3Ajbkl \
HsmA-iAXeedsCi57gzsQEeCBc8gisodoDNgzg4n7kBmywqzZ6cCGAhGdMaSKQFaFO7Q2nNR_x-chwlVKcAyol6 \
TXhJ2KJSCEITdYOk-K7DAHPwbmwzOwOLDq9zlG_0CE7ozKIaBFGY8W49GUoFAGVNRPwoRjKqzFA9fivpU1KeBd \
Yxt2fmpqE_Wvl0__5uD_506LepTa31b1KcJ2aWP5ZBiOJ09M9o16Bs7tENRn34N6KT3Yfplltv5_WHZzXNRP3y \
r6-qxqJ9K-C0hRIGFdcx8XFm9EpLOXJxaCmlgH7hmAUNKYWJHBtrzp9gbC77_kPmeWT9TSIz-rPS0URN29y80d \
H6aMZAB9Z8iPyuiqB9_oiar3GRRPRfVl_X_C3ToirpR-B5ZCeaoMJ2hZzekhhywJlWsvLCAEE0CS_BuSM1PVML \
JB6A_cJptFlBeZEMhE0NmoCwtWPJqvC-I85-5KgFe3Fol37jbVuNJVpQ6Br9A2j1DPbsEuUe2MZDAMrKlv4g6X \
065U2r3CpgnDG8UzmAJRS-qDwQy-mgNtAT3bpR-uikDvkcS5USMpIvLyN0I3qUysBAMPq9WroedxmRGMAfqL7b \
xyYIu1tL7kBsvoaUOoxD4hGjhFJGCEqwR3yhx_upyHlTAK3erY5GQ0xTREmBrc3C8EOnnqwH22Yxnix29N8Bg_ \
JXgRBLLSlAU6qMtPypmSf7hwyu7ISkkodBuvDWRyq6WDOKny_gZHJFJJn1bMYZAaPlHWqNxnUqgnDxnMSxdoBn \
TCFrShf5pK98XLrnL365jmaZiJtb8Ck2AYFnV5nn3UZLdtz7q-mCkYoEspmnLyPM9isTq4jNZg1x1c5t3SyXA1 \
3irYicvCh0FxXUI58uVlXJHHYlg4Hx1lQhOBMI_qNyY44N5enjCDR23zXa33zZ1td2Mxz3mP9ofqqqpd9Qb2j8 \
1_WHfHqr-0DQbPtZVvat2D1Vd7w67bdnsdoem2Vam2e5qwm2xq2hCtmXyn9KHYcMikY5P1eGx2lhsycr1YQ_Hb \
FJtHKTYVZZF5f2aslo6fo0D-ADsJPY9d5zEGJUta37Ri0OlV1cqRUPsNAYyZZ5icajAz5sY7PE_22UGnawv4_4zAAD__wZH_cM">



[Attachment #3 (text/plain)]

_______________________________________________
llvm-bugs mailing list
llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]