search for: mlir

Hi all, The TensorFlow team at Google has been leading the charge to build a new set of compiler infrastructure, known as the MLIR project <https://github.com/tensorflow/mlir>. The initial focus has been on machine learning infrastructure, high performance accelerators, heterogeneous compute, and HPC-style computations. That said, the implementation and design of this infrastructure is state of the art, is not specific...

Hello everyone, Since MLIR landed today. I'm trying to build it using cmake ../llvm/ -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=RELEASE -DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=X86 -DLLVM_ALL_PROJECTS="clang;lld;lldb;mlir" -DBUILD_SHARED_LIBS=ON -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER:STRING=lld and also by adding -DLLVM_ALL_PROJECTS. It's giving this compilatio...

...the build a couple of times it will likely succeed. > > I will try to fix this missing dependency today. > > -- > Mehdi > > > On Tue, Dec 24, 2019 at 1:37 AM Sourabh Singh Tomar <sourav0311 at gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hello everyone, >> >> Since MLIR landed today. I'm trying to build it using >> cmake ../llvm/ -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=RELEASE -DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=X86 >> -DLLVM_ALL_PROJECTS="clang;lld;lldb;mlir" -DBUILD_SHARED_LIBS=ON >> -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER:STRING=lld >> >> and also by adding -DLLVM_AL...

Hi, (bcc: mlir at tensorflow.org FYI) I am following-up on the integration of MLIR in LLVM as a subproject (Re: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-October/135687.html ). We're aiming to integrate into the monorepo next month. Right now our intent is for MLIR to live in a top-level directory in pa...

On Mon, 9 Sep 2019 at 22:22, Chris Lattner <clattner at google.com> wrote: > Including a bunch of content, eg a full langref doc: > https://github.com/tensorflow/mlir/blob/master/g3doc/LangRef.md Thanks Chris, that looks awesome! This one could perhaps be improved with time: https://github.com/tensorflow/mlir/blob/master/g3doc/ConversionToLLVMDialect.md Which I think was Hal's point. If we had a front-end already using it in tree, we could be a bit more r...

James Y Knight via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: > The alternative I had in mind would be to rewrite the commits on the branch > so that all the files are under an mlir/ subdirectory, and then do a normal > merge from that. I just sent a message about import-downstream-repo.py, shown here: https://github.com/jyknight/llvm-git-migration/pull/6/commits The default mode of operation does exactly what James says here. It rewrites the commits so all blobs are un...

Hi, I have few questions / concerns regarding the design of OpenMP dialect in MLIR that is currently being implemented, mainly for the f18 compiler. Below, I summarize the current state of various efforts in clang / f18 / MLIR / LLVM regarding this. Feel free to add to the list in case I have missed something. 1. [May 2019] An OpenMPIRBuilder in LLVM was proposed for flang and c...

...ready), so I don't foresee any additional costs. Though, Hal's points are spot on... On Mon, 9 Sep 2019 at 18:47, Finkel, Hal J. via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > 3. As a specific example of the above, the current development of the new Flang compiler depends on MLIR. Who knows, one day, Clang can, too! :) > 5. As a community, we have been moving toward increasing support for heterogeneous computing and accelerators (and given industry trends, I expect this to continue), and MLIR can facilitate that support in many cases (although I expect we'll see f...

On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 1:54 PM David Greene <greened at obbligato.org> wrote: > Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> writes: > > > Of course by its nature, MLIR doesn't lend itself to concrete semantic > >> descriptions, though I would expect the affine dialect (and others) to > >> have documentation on par with the LLVM IR. > > > > > > Just last week I had to scout through the affine dialect "LangRef > >...

On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 8:54 AM James Y Knight <jyknight at google.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 5:03 AM Mehdi AMINI via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> (bcc: mlir at tensorflow.org FYI) >> >> I am following-up on the integration of MLIR in LLVM as a subproject (Re: >> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-October/135687.html ). >> >> We're aiming to integrate into the monorepo next month. Right now our >> inten...

...to restrict my reply to how >> the “parallel (do)” construct would be lowered. >> >> > If it is OK we can have further discussions in discourse as River >> points out. >> >> Given that the multiple components of the LLVM project, namely clang, >> flang, MLIR and LLVM are involved, llvm-dev is probably a better place, >> with a much wider audience >> > > Possibly wider, but maybe less focused about discussing MLIR dialect > design. In particular there is an RFC thread for this particular dialect on > Discourse, which is the canon...

Am Mo., 27. Jan. 2020 um 22:06 Uhr schrieb Uday Kumar Reddy Bondhugula < uday at polymagelabs.com>: > Hi Michael, > > Although the approach to use a higher order in-memory abstraction like the > loop tree will make it easier than what you have today, if you used MLIR > for this representation, you already get a round trippable textual format > that is *very close* to your form. The affine.for/if, std.for/if in MLIR > are nearly isomorphic to the tree representation you want, and as such, > this drastically reduces the delta between the in-memory dat...

Hi, I broke the MLIR build yesterday and the two Flang bots told me about it pretty much right away. Yay! That is how I always thought the setup should work (modulo that we all try not to break builds). Today I got emails from an MLIR bot and I was a bit confused. I looked at the configuration of the two MLIR bots a...

...for the reply! It sounds like LLVM IR is being considered for optimizations in OpenMP constructs. There seems to be plans regarding improvement of LLVM IR Framework for providing things required for OpenMP / flang(?) Are there any design considerations which contain pros and cons about using the MLIR vs LLVM IR for various OpenMP related optimizations/ transformations? The latest RFC [ (3) in my original post ] mentions that: > So there exist some questions regarding where the optimisations should be carried out. Could you please provide more details on this? I would like to quote Chris...

...learly, is the need for > > an official specification, similar to the one for LLVM IR, as well as > > a formal document with the expected semantics into LLVM IR. Sooner, > > indeed. > > +1. There are all kinds of scattered documents on the TensorFlow site > talking about MLIR, the affine dialect, etc. but nothing of the quality > and approachability of LLVM's language reference. I find it difficult > to pull all the pieces together. > One of the main reason we haven't invested in a proper website and documentation was in anticipation of a possible int...

...>> >> On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 2:19 PM Chris Lattner <clattner at nondot.org> >> wrote: >> >>> On Feb 29, 2020, at 2:08 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> I've >>>> curious as >>>> to how MLIR deals with IPO as that's the problem I was running into. >>>> >>> >>> FWIW I believe LLVM's new pass manager (NPM) was designed with >>> parallelism and the ability to support this situation (that MLIR doesn't? >>> Or doesn't to the de...

On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 10:58 AM Fāng-ruì Sòng <maskray at google.com> wrote: > Since you are going to rewrite the mlir history anyway, you can > probably delete accidentally checked in large files if any. > Good point, I checked and this is the largest file in the history of the repo as far as I can tell: https://github.com/joker-eph/llvm-project-with-mlir/blob/master/mlir/g3doc/includes/img/view-operation.s...

+1 for batching. In practice it's probably more important that things get run for every MLIR checkin, and not necessarily for every LLVM checkin. Steve On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 9:26 AM Mehdi AMINI via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Indeed there is quite a backlog here right now: > http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/mlir-windows and here > http://lab.llvm.o...

...lel (do)” construct would be lowered. >>>> >>>> > If it is OK we can have further discussions in discourse as River >>>> points out. >>>> >>>> Given that the multiple components of the LLVM project, namely clang, >>>> flang, MLIR and LLVM are involved, llvm-dev is probably a better place, >>>> with a much wider audience >>>> >>> >>> Possibly wider, but maybe less focused about discussing MLIR dialect >>> design. In particular there is an RFC thread for this particular diale...

...nt in latest RFC For the above mentioned reasons, I will try to restrict my reply to how the “parallel (do)” construct would be lowered. > If it is OK we can have further discussions in discourse as River points out. Given that the multiple components of the LLVM project, namely clang, flang, MLIR and LLVM are involved, llvm-dev is probably a better place, with a much wider audience, until it is clear how different components must interact. > It is the review for translation to LLVM IR that is in progress. > “If we decide that the OpenMP construct (for e.g. collapse) can be handled f...