MLIR

Multi-Level IR Compiler Framework

Bufferization

Overview 

Bufferization in MLIR is the process of converting ops with tensor semantics to ops with memref semantics. MLIR provides an infrastructure that bufferizes an entire program in a single pass (One-Shot Bufferize). This infrastructure bufferizes all ops that implement the BufferizableOpInterface can be bufferized.

MLIR has an older bufferization infrastructure built around dialect conversion. Most dialect conversion bufferization patterns have been migrated to One-Shot Bufferize, but some functionality such as function boundary bufferization still depends on dialect conversion and its type converter. New projects should use One-Shot Bufferize, as the dialect conversion-based bufferization will eventually be deprecated. Moreover, One-Shot Bufferize results in better bufferization with fewer memory allocations and buffer copies. This documentation is mostly about One-Shot Bufferize, but also describes how to gradually migrate a project from dialect conversion-based bufferization to One-Shot Bufferize.

What is One-Shot Bufferize? 

One-Shot Bufferize is a new tensor bufferization pass designed for IR in destination-passing style, and with aggressive in-place bufferization.

One-Shot Bufferize is:

  • Monolithic: A single MLIR pass does the entire work, whereas the previous bufferization in MLIR was split across multiple passes residing in different dialects. In One-Shot Bufferize, BufferizableOpInterface implementations are spread across different dialects.

  • A whole-function at a time analysis. In-place bufferization decisions are made by analyzing SSA use-def chains on tensors. Op interface implementations not only provide the rewrite logic from tensor ops to memref ops, but also helper methods for One-Shot Bufferize’s analysis to query information about an op’s bufferization/memory semantics.

  • Extensible via an op interface: All ops that implement BufferizableOpInterface can be bufferized.

  • 2-Pass: Bufferization is internally broken down into 2 steps: First, analyze the entire IR and make bufferization decisions. Then, bufferize (rewrite) the IR. The analysis has access to exact SSA use-def information. It incrementally builds alias and equivalence sets and does not rely on a posteriori-alias analysis from preallocated memory.

  • Greedy: Operations are analyzed one-by-one and it is decided on the spot whether a tensor OpOperand must be copied or not. Heuristics determine the order of analysis.

  • Modular: The current One-Shot Analysis can be replaced with a different analysis. The result of the analysis are queried by the bufferization via AnalysisState, in particular AnalysisState::isInPlace. Any derived class of AnalysisState that implements a small number virtual functions can serve as a custom analysis. It is even possible to run One-Shot Bufferize without any analysis (AlwaysCopyAnalysisState), in which case One-Shot Bufferize behaves exactly like the old dialect conversion-based bufferization (i.e., copy every buffer before writing to it).

To reduce complexity, One-Shot Bufferize should be run after other transformations, typically as one of the last steps right before lowering memref ops. Many transformations are easier in tensor land; e.g., tile/fuse/… on tensors first, then bufferize the remaining IR.

From an architecture perspective, One-Shot Bufferize consists of BufferizableOpInterface (and its implementations) and an analysis of tensor SSA values that decides if a buffer can be used directly or must be copied. The [bufferize] method of the op interface inspects analysis results and rewrites tensor ops into memref ops.

Goals of Bufferization 

The high-level goal of every bufferization technique is to: 1. Use as little memory as possible. 2. Copy as little memory as possible.

This implies reusing already allocated buffers when possible, turning bufferization into an algorithmically complex problem with similarities to register allocation.

Depending on the concrete use case, there may be additional bufferization requirements. If the contents of a buffer are expensive to compute, there could be a tradeoff between recomputation and compute once and copy. On the contrary, it may not even be possible to allocate new buffers at runtime on some architectures.

Destination-Passing Style 

Bufferization is an algorithmically complex problem. Given an op with a tensor result, bufferization has to choose a memref buffer in which the result can be stored. It is always safe to allocate a brand new buffer, but such a bufferization strategy would be unacceptable for high-performance codegen. When choosing an already existing buffer, we must be careful not to accidentally overwrite data that is still needed later in the program.

To simplify this problem, One-Shot Bufferize was designed for ops that are in destination-passing style. For every tensor result, such ops have a tensor operand, who’s buffer could be for storing the result of the op in the absence of other conflicts. We call such tensor operands the destination.

As an example, consider the following op: %0 = tensor.insert %cst into %t[%idx] : tensor<?xf32>

%t is the destination in this example. When choosing a buffer for the result %0, One-Shot Bufferize considers only two options:

  1. buffer(%0) = buffer(%t).
  2. buffer(%0) is a newly allocated buffer.

There may be other buffers in the same function that could potentially be used for buffer(%0), but those are not considered by One-Shot Bufferize to keep the bufferization simple. One-Shot Bufferize could be extended to consider such buffers in the future to achieve a better quality of bufferization.

Tensor ops that are not in destination-passing style always bufferize to a memory allocation. E.g.:

%0 = tensor.generate %sz {
^bb0(%i : index):
  %cst = arith.constant 0.0 : f32
  tensor.yield %cst : f32
} : tensor<?xf32>

The result of tensor.generate does not have a “destination”, so bufferization allocates a new buffer. This could be avoided by choosing an op such as linalg.generic, which can express the same computation with a destination (“out”) tensor:

#map = affine_map<(i) -> (i)>
%0 = linalg.generic {indexing_maps = [#map], iterator_types = ["parallel"]}
                    outs(%t : tensor<?xf32>) {
  ^bb0(%arg0 : f32):
    %cst = arith.constant 0.0 : f32
    linalg.yield %cst : f32
} -> tensor<?xf32>

At first glance, the above linalg.generic op may not seem very useful because the output tensor %t is entirely overwritten. Why pass the tensor %t as an operand in the first place? As an example, this can be useful for overwriting a slice of a tensor:

%t = tensor.extract_slice %s [%idx] [%sz] [1] : tensor<?xf32> to tensor<?xf32>
%0 = linalg.generic ... outs(%t) { ... } -> tensor<?xf32>
%1 = tensor.insert_slice %0 into %s [%idx] [%sz] [1]
    : tensor<?xf32> into tensor<?xf32>

The above example bufferizes to a memref.subview, followed by a “linalg.generic on memrefs” that overwrites the memory of the subview. The tensor.insert_slice bufferizes to a no-op (in the absence of RaW conflicts such as a subsequent read of %s).

RaW conflicts are detected with an analysis of SSA use-def chains (details later). One-Shot Bufferize works best if there is a single SSA use-def chain, where the result of a tensor op is the “destination” operand of the next tensor ops, e.g.:

%0 = "my_dialect.some_op"(%t) : (tensor<?xf32>) -> (tensor<?xf32>)
%1 = "my_dialect.another_op"(%0) : (tensor<?xf32>) -> (tensor<?xf32>)
%2 = "my_dialect.yet_another_op"(%1) : (tensor<?xf32>) -> (tensor<?xf32>)

Buffer copies are likely inserted if the SSA use-def chain splits at some point, e.g.:

%0 = "my_dialect.some_op"(%t) : (tensor<?xf32>) -> (tensor<?xf32>)
%1 = "my_dialect.another_op"(%0) : (tensor<?xf32>) -> (tensor<?xf32>)
%2 = "my_dialect.yet_another_op"(%0) : (tensor<?xf32>) -> (tensor<?xf32>)

One-Shot Bufferize has debug flags (test-analysis-only print-conflicts) that print the results of the analysis and explain to the user why buffer copies were inserted.

Using One-Shot Bufferize 

MLIR provides a pass -one-shot-bufferize that performs an analysis and bufferizes all ops with tensor semantics that implement BufferizableOpInterface. For modularity reasons, these op interface implementations are typically external models that live in a dialect’s “Transforms” build unit. (External models are a mechanism for implementing an op interface in a different build unit.) It is the user’s responsibility to ensure that all needed external models are registered before running One-Shot Bufferize.

By default, One-Shot Bufferize fails when it encounters an op with tensor semantics (i.e., tensor result or tensor operand) that is not bufferizable (i.e., does not implement BufferizableOpInterface). This can be avoided with allow-unknown-ops. In that case, One-Shot Bufferize inserts to_memref/to_tensor ops around the bufferization boundary. These ops are named versions of unrealized_conversion_cast. Note that One-Shot Bufferize’s analysis can currently not analyze these ops, so input IR with such ops may fail bufferization. Therefore, running One-Shot Bufferize multiple times in a sequence is also not supported at the moment.

One-Shot Bufferize can be configured to bufferize only ops from a set of dialects with dialect-filter. This can be useful for gradually migrating from dialect conversion-based bufferization to One-Shot Bufferize. One-Shot Bufferize must run first in such a case, because dialect conversion-based bufferization generates to_tensor/to_memref ops which One-Shot Bufferize cannot analyze.

One-Shot Bufferize can also be called programmatically with bufferization::runOneShotBufferize. Alternatively, bufferization::bufferizeOp skips the analysis and inserts a copy on every buffer write, just like the dialect conversion-based bufferization.

Buffer Deallocation 

One-Shot Bufferize deallocates all buffers that it allocates. This is in contrast to the dialect conversion-based bufferization that delegates this job to the -buffer-deallocation pass. By default, One-Shot Bufferize rejects IR where a newly allocated buffer is returned from a block. Such IR will fail bufferization.

A new buffer allocation is returned from a block when the result of an op that is not in destination-passing style is returned. E.g.:

%0 = scf.if %c -> (tensor<?xf32>) {
  %1 = tensor.generate ... -> tensor<?xf32>
  scf.yield %1 : tensor<?xf32>
} else {
  scf.yield %another_tensor : tensor<?xf32>
}

The scf.yield in the “else” branch is OK, but the scf.yield in the “then” branch will be rejected.

Another case in which a buffer allocation may be returned is when a buffer copy must be inserted due to a RaW conflict. E.g.:

%0 = scf.if %c -> (tensor<?xf32>) {
  %1 = tensor.insert %cst into %another_tensor[%idx] : tensor<?xf32>
  "my_dialect.reading_tensor_op"(%another_tensor) : (tensor<?xf32>) -> ()
  ...
  scf.yield %1 : tensor<?xf32>
} else {
  scf.yield %yet_another_tensor : tensor<?xf32>
}

In the above example, a buffer copy of buffer(%another_tensor) (with %cst inserted) is yielded from the “then” branch.

In both examples, a buffer is allocated inside of a block and then yielded from the block. Deallocation of such buffers is tricky and not currently implemented in an efficient way. For this reason, One-Shot Bufferize must be explicitly configured with allow-return-allocs to support such IR.

When running with allow-return-allocs, One-Shot Bufferize may introduce allocations that cannot be deallocated by One-Shot Bufferize yet. For that reason, -buffer-deallocation must be run after One-Shot Bufferize. This buffer deallocation pass resolves yields of newly allocated buffers with copies. E.g., the scf.if example above would bufferize to IR similar to the following:

%0 = scf.if %c -> (memref<?xf32>) {
  %1 = memref.alloc(...) : memref<?xf32>
  ...
  scf.yield %1 : memref<?xf32>
} else {
  %2 = memref.alloc(...) : memref<?xf32>
  memref.copy %another_memref, %2
  scf.yield %2 : memref<?xf32>
}

In the bufferized IR, both branches return a newly allocated buffer, so it does not matter which if-branch was taken. In both cases, the resulting buffer %0 must be deallocated at some point after the scf.if (unless the %0 is returned/yielded from its block).

Note: Buffer allocations that are returned from a function are not deallocated, not even with -buffer-deallocation. It is the caller’s responsibility to deallocate the buffer. In the future, this could be automated with allocation hoisting (across function boundaries) or reference counting.

One-Shot Bufferize can be configured to leak all memory and not generate any buffer deallocations with create-deallocs=0. This can be useful for compatibility with legacy code that has its own method of deallocating buffers.

Memory Layouts 

One-Shot Bufferize bufferizes ops from top to bottom. This works well when all ops are bufferizable. However, when encountering a non-bufferizable tensor with allow-unknown-ops, One-Shot Bufferize must insert to_memref ops at the bufferization boundary and decide on a memref type. By default, One-Shot Bufferize choose the most dynamic memref type wrt. layout maps. E.g.:

%0 = "my_dialect.unbufferizable_op(%t) : (tensor<?x?xf32>) -> (tensor<?x?xf32>)
%1 = tensor.extract %0[%idx1, %idx2] : tensor<?xf32>

When bufferizing the above IR, One-Shot Bufferize inserts a to_memref ops with dynamic offset and strides:

#map = affine_map<(d0, d1)[s0, s1, s2] -> (d0 * s1 + s0 + d1 * s2)>
%0 = "my_dialect.unbufferizable_op(%t) : (tensor<?x?xf32>) -> (tensor<?x?xf32>)
%0_m = bufferization.to_memref %0 : memref<?x?xf32, #map>
%1 = memref.load %0_m[%idx1, %idx2] : memref<?x?xf32, #map>

All users of %0 have fully dynamic layout maps. This ensures that the bufferized IR composes well with future bufferizations of unbufferizable_op (maybe bufferized by another pass), regardless of the exact memref type of the future bufferization. If the op turns out to be bufferized to an op with a simpler memref type (e.g., identity layout map), we expect that canonicalization patterns would clean up unnecessarily dynamic layout maps. (Some of these canonicalization patterns may not be implemented yet.)

One-Shot Bufferize tries to infer the most precise memref type when bufferizing an op. If the entire IR is bufferizable, we do not have to resort to conservatively use fully dynamic layout maps. In that case, we also do not have to rely on canonicalization patterns to clean up the bufferized IR.

Note: There are some bufferizable ops for which a percise layout map cannot be inferred. E.g., a tensor.cast from a tensor<*xf32> to a tensor<?x?xf32> must be bufferized to a memref.cast with a memref type that has a fully dynamic layout map.

One-Shot Bufferize has an option unknown-type-conversion to control the generation of layout maps when no precise layout can be inferred:

  • fully-dynamic-layout-map uses fully dynamic layout maps and is the default behavior. This composes well when IR is partially bufferized.
  • identity-layout-map uses static identity layout maps. This option can be useful for legacy code that cannot handle memref types with layout maps. Note that this setting can lead to additional buffer copies when folding a to_tensor/to_memref pair with memref types that are not cast-compatible.

Note: The unknown-type-conversion option does not affect layout maps of function signatures. There is a separate function-signature-type-conversion option that controls layout maps of function parameters and function results.

Extending One-Shot Bufferize 

Custom ops can be bufferized if they implement BufferizableOpInterface. Users must at least implement the following interface methods.

  • bufferizesToMemoryRead: Return true if the buffer of the given tensor OpOperand is read.
  • bufferizesToMemoryWrite: Return true if the buffer of the given tensor OpOperand is written (if bufferizing in-place).
  • getAliasingOpResult: Return the OpResults that may share the same buffer as the given OpOperand. This interface method describes to OpOperand-to-OpResult mapping wrt. destination-passing style.
  • bufferRelation: Return BufferRelation::Equivalent if the given OpResult is the exact same memref as the aliasing OpOperand after bufferization (in case of in-place bufferization). Otherwise, (e.g., they overlap but are not necessarily the exact same memrefs), BufferRelation::None should be returned. Additional buffer relations will be added in the future, but BufferRelation::None is always safe.
  • bufferize: Rewrite the op with the given rewriter. Ops should be replaced with bufferization::replaceOpWithBufferizedValues.

To get a better intuition of the interface methods, we invite users to take a look at existing implementations in MLIR, e.g., the implementation of tensor.insert or tensor.extract.

Debugging Buffer Copies 

To get a better understanding of why One-Shot Bufferize introduced a buffer copy, users can run the pass with test-analysis-only print-conflicts. Every tensor op is then annotated with an attribute that has a boolean value for each tensor OpOperand. true means that the OpOperand bufferizes in-place. false means that the OpOperand bufferizes out-of-place and a buffer copy will be inserted.

There are two reasons why a buffer copy may be inserted.

  1. Due to a RaW conflict, it is not safe to bufferize in-place. I.e., the overwritten data is still needed.
  2. The buffer is not writable. E.g., memref.global buffers that are the result of arith.constant ops are never modified.

In the first case, print-conflicts illustrates the conflict in the form of a (“read”, “conflicting write”, “last write”) tuple.

Understanding the SSA Use-Def Chain Analysis 

To get a better understanding of the SSA Use-Def Chain Analysis and the RaW conflict detection algorithm, we invite interested users to read the design document and watch the corresponding ODM talk ( slides). can be used to bufferize a program in a single pass, as long as each op

Migrating from Dialect Conversion-based Bufferization 

Both dialect conversion-based bufferization and One-Shot Bufferize generate to_tensor/to_memref ops at the bufferization boundary (when run with allow-unknown-ops). They can be combined and run in sequence. However, One-Shot Bufferize must run first because it cannot analyze those boundary ops. To update existing code step-by-step, it may be useful to specify a dialect filter for One-Shot Bufferize, so that dialects can be switched over one-by-one.

Bufferization Function Graphs 

One-Shot Bufferize does currently not support function graph bufferization. I.e., CallOp, ReturnOp and function bbArgs are not bufferizable. Users can run the existing --func-bufferize bufferization pass after One-Shot Bufferize.

Alternatively, users can try ModuleBufferization, which is an extension of One-Shot Bufferize. This bufferization is still under development and does not support arbitrary IR. In essence, returning a tensor from a function is not supported, unless it is equivalent to a function bbArg. In that case, the corresponding return value can simply be dropped during bufferization.

Dialect Conversion-based Bufferization 

Disclaimer: Most dialect conversion-based bufferization has been migrated to One-Shot Bufferize. New users should use One-Shot Bufferize (with or without analysis). The following documentation is only for existing users of dialect conversion-based bufferization.

This system is a simple application of MLIR’s dialect conversion infrastructure. The bulk of the code related to bufferization is a set of ordinary ConversionPattern’s that dialect authors write for converting ops that operate on tensor’s to ops that operate on memref’s. A set of conventions and best practices are followed that allow these patterns to be run across multiple independent passes (rather than requiring a single huge atomic conversion pass), which makes the compilation pipelines scalable, robust, and easy to debug.

This document is targeted at people looking to utilize MLIR’s bufferization functionality, along with people who want to extend it to cover their own ops.

NOTE: Before reading this document, please watch the talk “Type Conversions the Not-So-Hard-Way: MLIR’s New Bufferization Infrastructure” ( slides, recording). That talk gives a high-level overview of the bufferization infrastructure and important conceptual details related to using the MLIR dialect conversion infrastructure.

Bufferization’s place in a compilation pipeline 

Bufferization itself does not free any of the buffers that have been allocated, nor does it do anything particularly intelligent with the placement of buffers w.r.t. control flow. Thus, a realistic compilation pipeline will usually consist of:

  1. Bufferization
  2. Buffer optimizations such as buffer-hoisting, buffer-loop-hoisting, and promote-buffers-to-stack, which do optimizations that are only exposed after bufferization.
  3. Finally, running the buffer deallocation pass.

After buffer deallocation has been completed, the program will be quite difficult to transform due to the presence of the deallocation ops. Thus, other optimizations such as linalg fusion on memrefs should be done before that stage.

General structure of the bufferization process 

Bufferization consists of running multiple partial bufferization passes, followed by one finalizing bufferization pass.

There is typically one partial bufferization pass per dialect (though other subdivisions are possible). For example, for a dialect X there will typically be a pass X-bufferize that knows how to bufferize all the ops in that dialect. By running pass X-bufferize for each dialect X in the program, all the ops in the program are incrementally bufferized.

Partial bufferization passes create programs where only some ops have been bufferized. These passes will create materializations (also sometimes called “casts”) that convert between the tensor and memref type, which allows bridging between ops that have been bufferized and ops that have not yet been bufferized.

Finalizing bufferizations complete the bufferization process, and guarantee that there are no tensors remaining in the program. This involves eliminating the materializations. The pass finalizing-bufferize provides a minimal pass that only eliminates materializations and issues an error if any unbufferized ops exist in the program.

However, it is possible for a finalizing bufferization to do more than just eliminate materializations. By adding patterns (just as a partial bufferization would), it is possible for a finalizing bufferization pass to simultaneously bufferize ops and eliminate materializations. This has a number of disadvantages discussed in the talk and should generally be avoided.

Example 

As a concrete example, we will look at the bufferization pipeline from the mlir-npcomp reference backend ( code). The code, slightly simplified and annotated, is reproduced here:

  // Partial bufferization passes.
  pm.addPass(createTensorConstantBufferizePass());
  pm.addNestedPass<func::FuncOp>(createTCPBufferizePass()); // Bufferizes the downstream `tcp` dialect.
  pm.addNestedPass<func::FuncOp>(createSCFBufferizePass());
  pm.addNestedPass<func::FuncOp>(createLinalgBufferizePass());
  pm.addNestedPass<func::FuncOp>(createTensorBufferizePass());
  pm.addPass(createFuncBufferizePass());

  // Finalizing bufferization pass.
  pm.addNestedPass<func::FuncOp>(createFinalizingBufferizePass());

Looking first at the partial bufferization passes, we see that there are a sequence of FuncOp passes (which run in parallel on functions). These function passes are bracketed by arith-bufferize and func-bufferize, which are module passes (and thus serialize the parallel compilation process). These two passes must be module passes because they make changes to the top-level module.

The bulk of the bufferization work is done by the function passes. Most of these passes are provided as part of the upstream MLIR distribution and bufferize their respective dialects (e.g. scf-bufferize bufferizes the scf dialect). The tcp-bufferize pass is an exception – it is a partial bufferization pass used to bufferize the downstream tcp dialect, and fits in perfectly with all the other passes provided upstream.

The last pass is the finalizing bufferization pass. The mlir-npcomp reference backend has arranged that all ops are bufferized by partial bufferizations, so that the upstream finalizing-bufferize pass can be used as the finalizing bufferization pass. This gives excellent diagnostics when something goes wrong with the bufferization process, such as due to an op that wasn’t handled by any pattern.

How to write a partial bufferization pass 

The contract of a partial bufferization pass is that a subset of ops (or kinds of ops, customizable by a ConversionTarget) get bufferized.

A partial bufferization pass is just a pass that uses the dialect conversion framework to apply ConversionPatterns with a tensor to memref type conversion.

To describe how to write such a pass, we will walk through an example, the tensor-bufferize pass ( code, test) that bufferizes the tensor dialect. Note that these passes have been replaced with a BufferizableOpInterface-based implementation in the meantime, so we have to take a looker at an older version of the code.

The bulk of the code in the pass will be a set of conversion patterns, with a simple example being BufferizeCastOp).

class BufferizeCastOp : public OpConversionPattern<tensor::CastOp> {
public:
  using OpConversionPattern::OpConversionPattern;
  LogicalResult
  matchAndRewrite(tensor::CastOp op, OpAdaptor adaptor,
                  ConversionPatternRewriter &rewriter) const override {
    auto resultType = getTypeConverter()->convertType(op.getType());
    rewriter.replaceOpWithNewOp<MemRefCastOp>(op, resultType, adaptor.source());
    return success();
  }
};

See the talk for more details on how to write these patterns.

The pass itself is very small, and follows the basic pattern of any dialect conversion pass.

void mlir::populateTensorBufferizePatterns(
    BufferizeTypeConverter &typeConverter, RewritePatternSet &patterns) {
  patterns.add<BufferizeCastOp, BufferizeExtractOp>(typeConverter,
                                                    patterns.getContext());
}

struct TensorBufferizePass : public TensorBufferizeBase<TensorBufferizePass> {
  void runOnOperation() override {
    auto *context = &getContext();
    BufferizeTypeConverter typeConverter;
    RewritePatternSet patterns(context);
    ConversionTarget target(*context);

    populateTensorBufferizePatterns(typeConverter, patterns);
    target.addIllegalOp<tensor::CastOp, tensor::ExtractOp>();
    target.addLegalDialect<func::FuncDialect>();

    if (failed(
            applyPartialConversion(getOperation(), target, std::move(patterns))))
      signalPassFailure();
  }
};

The pass has all the hallmarks of a dialect conversion pass that does type conversions: a TypeConverter, a RewritePatternSet, and a ConversionTarget, and a call to applyPartialConversion. Note that a function populateTensorBufferizePatterns is separated, so that power users can use the patterns independently, if necessary (such as to combine multiple sets of conversion patterns into a single conversion call, for performance).

One convenient utility provided by the MLIR bufferization infrastructure is the BufferizeTypeConverter, which comes pre-loaded with the necessary conversions and materializations between tensor and memref.

In this case, the BufferizationOpsDialect is marked as legal, so the bufferization.to_tensor and bufferization.to_memref ops, which are inserted automatically by the dialect conversion framework as materializations, are legal. There is a helper populateBufferizeMaterializationLegality ( code) which helps with this in general.

Other partial bufferization examples 

  • scf-bufferize ( code, test)

    • Bufferizes ops from the scf dialect.
    • This is an example of how to bufferize ops that implement RegionBranchOpInterface (that is, they use regions to represent control flow).
    • The bulk of the work is done by lib/Dialect/SCF/Transforms/StructuralTypeConversions.cpp ( code), which is well-commented and covers how to correctly convert ops that contain regions.
  • func-bufferize ( code, test)

    • Bufferizes func, call, and BranchOpInterface ops.
    • This is an example of how to bufferize ops that have multi-block regions.
    • This is an example of a pass that is not split along dialect subdivisions.

How to write a finalizing bufferization pass 

The contract of a finalizing bufferization pass is that all tensors are gone from the program.

The easiest way to write a finalizing bufferize pass is to not write one at all! MLIR provides a pass finalizing-bufferize which eliminates the bufferization.to_tensor / bufferization.to_memref materialization ops inserted by partial bufferization passes and emits an error if that is not sufficient to remove all tensors from the program.

This pass is sufficient when partial bufferization passes have bufferized all the ops in the program, leaving behind only the materializations. When possible, it is recommended to structure your pass pipeline this way, as this has the significant advantage that if an op does not get bufferized (due to a missing pattern, bug in the code, etc.), finalizing-bufferize will emit a nice clean error, and the IR seen by finalizing-bufferize will only contain only one unbufferized op.

However, before the current bufferization infrastructure was put in place, bufferization could only be done as a single finalizing bufferization mega-pass that used the populate*BufferizePatterns functions from multiple dialects to simultaneously bufferize everything at once. Thus, one might see code in downstream projects structured this way. This structure is not recommended in new code. A helper, populateEliminateBufferizeMaterializationsPatterns ( code) is available for such passes to provide patterns that eliminate bufferization.to_tensor and bufferization.to_memref.

Changes since the talk

  • func-bufferize was changed to be a partial conversion pass, and there is a new finalizing-bufferize which serves as a general finalizing bufferization pass.
  • Most partial bufferization passes have been reimplemented in terms of BufferizableOpInterface. New users should use One-Shot Bufferize instead of dialect conversion-based bufferization.