Bufferization
Overview ¶
Bufferization in MLIR is the process of converting ops with tensor
semantics
to ops with memref
semantics. There are multiple MLIR passes that are related
to bufferization. These passes typically run as one of the last steps in a
pass pipeline, right before lowering to memref
ops to LLVM. That is because
many transformations are easier or only supported in tensor land; e.g.,
tile/fuse/… on tensors first,
then bufferize the remaining IR.
The most important bufferization pass is One-Shot Bufferize: This pass
rewrites tensor
IR to memref
IR. There are additional helper passes that
preprocess IR (e.g., so that IR can be bufferized more efficiently), perform
buffer-level optimizations such as allocation hoisting, and
insert buffer deallocation ops so that
the resulting memref
IR has no memory leaks.
Deprecated Passes ¶
The old dialect conversion-based bufferization passes have been deprecated and should not be used anymore. Most of those passes have already been removed from MLIR. One-Shot Bufferize produces in better bufferization results with fewer memory allocations and buffer copies.
The buffer deallocation pass has been deprecated in favor of the ownership-based buffer deallocation pipeline. The deprecated pass has some limitations that may cause memory leaks in the resulting IR.
What is One-Shot Bufferize? ¶
One-Shot Bufferize is a 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.
Extensible via an op interface: All ops that implement
BufferizableOpInterface
can be bufferized.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.
2-Phase: 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 particularAnalysisState::isInPlace
. Any derived class ofAnalysisState
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 copies every buffer before writing to it.
Note that One-Shot Bufferize does not deallocate buffers. That is done by the Ownership-based Buffer Deallocation passes.
Goals of Bufferization ¶
The high-level goal of every bufferization technique is to:
- Use as little memory as possible.
- 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 to take advantage of
destination-passing style (DPS). In MLIR, DPS op should implement the
DestinationStyleOpInterface
.
DPS exists in itself independently of bufferization and is tied to SSA
semantics: many ops are “updating” a part of their input SSA variables. For
example the LLVM instruction
insertelement
is inserting an element inside a vector. Since SSA values are immutable, the
operation returns a copy of the input vector with the element inserted.
Another example in MLIR is linalg.generic
on tensors, which always has an
extra outs
operand for each result, which provides the initial values to
update (for example when the operation is doing a reduction).
outs
operands are referred to as “destinations” in the following (quotes are
important as this operand isn’t modified in place but copied) and comes into
place in the context of bufferization as a possible “anchor” for the
bufferization algorithm. This allows the user to shape the input in a form that
guarantees close to optimal bufferization result when carefully choosing the
SSA value used as “destination”.
For every tensor result, a DPS op has a corresponding tensor operand. If there aren’t any other conflicting uses of this tensor, the bufferization can alias it with the op result and perform the operation “in-place” by reusing the buffer allocated for this “destination” input.
As an example, consider the following op: %r = tensor.insert %f into %t[%idx] : tensor<5xf32>
%t
is the “destination” in this example. When choosing a buffer for the result
%r
, denoted as buffer(%r)
, One-Shot Bufferize considers only two options:
buffer(%r) = buffer(%t)
: store the result in the existingbuffer(%t)
. Note that this is not always possible. E.g., if the old contents ofbuffer(%t)
are still needed. One-Shot Bufferize’s main task is to detect such cases and fall back to the second option when necessary.buffer(%r)
is a newly allocated buffer.
There may be other buffers in the same function that could potentially be used
for buffer(%r)
, 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 bufferized 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” operand, so
bufferization allocates a new buffer. This could be avoided by instead using an
op such as linalg.generic
, which can express the same computation with a
“destination” operand, as specified behind outputs (outs
):
#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, assuming
that the slice %t
has no other user. The tensor.insert_slice
then 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 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>)
// "yet_another_op" likely needs to read the data of %0, so "another_op" cannot
// in-place write to buffer(%0).
%2 = "my_dialect.yet_another_op"(%0) : (tensor<?xf32>) -> (tensor<?xf32>)
Tensor / MemRef Boundary ¶
The bufferization dialect provides a few helper ops to connect tensor IR (that should be bufferized) with existing buffers (that may be allocated/provided by a different runtime/library/etc.).
bufferization.to_memref %t
returns the future buffer of a tensor SSA value.
bufferization.to_tensor %m
returns a tensor SSA value for a given MemRef
buffer. bufferization.materialize_in_destination
indicates that a tensor value
should materialize in a certain buffer.
Consider the following example, where a TOSA matmul result should materialize in
an existing buffer %C
:
// Batched TOSA matrix multiplication. %A and %B are the
// inputs, %C is the output.
func.func @test_matmul(%A: memref<1x17x19xf32>,
%B: memref<1x19x29xf32>,
%C: memref<1x17x29xf32>) {
%A_tensor = bufferization.to_tensor %A restrict : memref<1x17x19xf32>
%B_tensor = bufferization.to_tensor %B restrict : memref<1x19x29xf32>
%0 = tosa.matmul %A_tensor, %B_tensor
: (tensor<1x17x19xf32>, tensor<1x19x29xf32>) ->
tensor<1x17x29xf32>
bufferization.materialize_in_destination
%0 in restrict writable %C
: (tensor<1x17x29xf32>, memref<1x17x29xf32>) -> ()
return
}
Note that all bufferization ops in this example have the restrict
unit
attribute set. This attribute is similar to the C restrict keyword and indicates
that there is no other to_tensor
or materialize_in_destination
op with
the same or an aliasing MemRef operand. Only such
to_tensor
/materialize_in_destination
ops are supported. The restrict
attribute gives strong aliasing guarantees to the bufferization analysis and
allows us to look only at the tensor IR in a program. (Ops that do not operate
on tensors are ignored by the One-Shot Bufferize.)
Also note that tosa.matmul
cannot be bufferized as is: there is no
BufferizableOpInterface
implementation for that op. However, the op can be
lowered to a combination of tensor.empty
and linalg.matmul
, which can be
bufferized.
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.
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
ops without the restrict
unit attribute, 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.
By default, function boundaries are not bufferized. This is because there are
currently limitations around function graph bufferization: recursive
calls are not supported. As long as there are no recursive calls, function
boundary bufferization can be enabled with bufferize-function-boundaries
. Each
tensor function argument and tensor function result is then turned into a
memref. The layout map of the memref type can be controlled with
function-boundary-type-conversion
.
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:
%0 = "my_dialect.unbufferizable_op(%t) : (tensor<?x?xf32>) -> (tensor<?x?xf32>)
%0_m = bufferization.to_memref %0 : memref<?x?xf32, strided<[?, ?], offset: ?>>
%1 = memref.load %0_m[%idx1, %idx2] : memref<?x?xf32, strided<[?, ?], offset: ?>>
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 ato_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
: Returntrue
if the buffer of the given tensor OpOperand is read.bufferizesToMemoryWrite
: Returntrue
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
: ReturnBufferRelation::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::Unknown
should be returned. Additional buffer relations will be added in the future, butBufferRelation::Unknown
is always safe.bufferize
: Rewrite the op with the given rewriter. Ops should be replaced withbufferization::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
.
Interface implementations of DPS ops (that implement
DestinationStyleOpInterface
) can derive from
DstBufferizableOpInterfaceExternalModel
, which provides all necessary
method implementations except for bufferize
.
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.
- Due to a RaW conflict, it is not safe to bufferize in-place. I.e., the overwritten data is still needed.
- The buffer is not writable. E.g.,
memref.global
buffers that are the result ofarith.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.
A RaW conflict consists of three parts, in the following order according to op dominance:
- Definition: A tensor
%t
is defined. - Conflicting Write: An operation writes to
buffer(%t)
. - Read: An operation reads
%t
.
When such a RaW conflict is detected during the analysis phase, One-Shot Bufferize will insert a buffer copy for the conflicting write.
Example
// RUN: mlir-opt %s -one-shot-bufferize="bufferize-function-boundaries test-analysis-only print-conflicts"
func.func @test(%arg0: f32, %arg1: f32, %arg2: index, %arg3: index) -> (f32, tensor<3xf32>) {
// Create a new tensor with [%arg0, %arg0, %arg0].
%0 = tensor.from_elements %arg0, %arg0, %arg0 : tensor<3xf32>
// Insert something into the new tensor.
%1 = tensor.insert %arg1 into %0[%arg2] : tensor<3xf32>
// Read from the old tensor.
%r = tensor.extract %0[%arg3] : tensor<3xf32>
// Return the extracted value and the result of the insertion.
func.return %r, %1 : f32, tensor<3xf32>
}
The output IR is as follows:
func.func @test(%arg0: f32, %arg1: f32, %arg2: index, %arg3: index) -> (f32, tensor<3xf32>) {
%from_elements = tensor.from_elements %arg0, %arg0, %arg0 {"C_0[DEF: result 0]"} : tensor<3xf32>
%inserted = tensor.insert %arg1 into %from_elements[%arg2] {"C_0[CONFL-WRITE: 1]", __inplace_operands_attr__ = ["none", "false", "none"]} : tensor<3xf32>
%extracted = tensor.extract %from_elements[%arg3] {"C_0[READ: 0]", __inplace_operands_attr__ = ["true", "none"]} : tensor<3xf32>
return {__inplace_operands_attr__ = ["none", "true"]} %extracted, %inserted : f32, tensor<3xf32>
}
Note that the IR was not bufferized. It was merely annotated with the results
of the bufferization analysis. Every operation with tensor semantics has a
__inplace_operands_attr__
attribute with one value per operand. If an operand
is not a tensor, the respective value is none
. Otherwise, if the operand was
decided to be bufferized in-place, the value is true
. A value of false
indicates a buffer copy. In the above example, a buffer copy would be inserted
for tensor.insert
, so that it does not overwrite buffer(%from_elements)
,
which is still needed for tensor.extract
.
For each RaW (there is only one in the example), three C_i
attributes were
added:
C_0[DEF: result 0]
: A tensor is defined: 0-th result oftensor.from_elements
.C_0[CONFL-WRITE: 1]
: An operation (if bufferized in-place) would write into the future buffer of the defined tensor: 1-st operand oftensor.insert
.C_0[READ: 0]
: An operation reads the tensor definition: 0-th operand oftensor.extract
.
The fully bufferized IR (with the inserted buffer copy) is as follows:
func.func @test(%arg0: f32, %arg1: f32, %arg2: index, %arg3: index) -> (f32, memref<3xf32>) {
%c2 = arith.constant 2 : index
%c1 = arith.constant 1 : index
%c0 = arith.constant 0 : index
%alloc = memref.alloc() {alignment = 64 : i64} : memref<3xf32>
memref.store %arg0, %alloc[%c0] : memref<3xf32>
memref.store %arg0, %alloc[%c1] : memref<3xf32>
memref.store %arg0, %alloc[%c2] : memref<3xf32>
%alloc_0 = memref.alloc() {alignment = 64 : i64} : memref<3xf32>
memref.copy %alloc, %alloc_0 : memref<3xf32> to memref<3xf32>
memref.store %arg1, %alloc_0[%arg2] : memref<3xf32>
%0 = memref.load %alloc[%arg3] : memref<3xf32>
return %0, %alloc_0 : f32, memref<3xf32>
}
To get a better understanding of the SSA Use-Def Chain Analysis and the RaW conflict detection algorithm, interested users may want to refer to:
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.
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:
- Bufferization
- Buffer optimizations such as
buffer-hoisting
,buffer-loop-hoisting
, andpromote-buffers-to-stack
, which do optimizations that are only exposed after bufferization. - Finally, running the ownership-based 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
ConversionPattern
s 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 ¶
- 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.
- Bufferizes ops from the
- Bufferizes
func
,call
, andBranchOpInterface
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.
- Bufferizes
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 newfinalizing-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.