[CIR][Lowering] add cir.ternary to scf.if lowering #368
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
There's really no way around this I'm aware of - it's totally fine! |
lanza
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 29, 2024
This PR adds `cir.ternary` lowering. There are two approaches to lower `cir.ternary` imo: 1. Use `scf.if` op. 2. Use `cf.cond_br` op. I choose `scf.if` because `scf.if` + canonicalization produces `arith.select` whereas `cf.cond_br` requires scf lifting. In many ways `scf.if` is more high-level and closer to `cir.ternary`. A separate `cir.yield` lowering is required since we cannot directly replace `cir.yield` in the ternary op lowering -- the yield operands may still be illegal and doing so produces `builtin.unrealized_cast` ops. I couldn't figured out a way to solve this issue without adding a separate lowering pattern. Please let me know if you know a way to solve this issue.
lanza
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 23, 2024
This PR adds `cir.ternary` lowering. There are two approaches to lower `cir.ternary` imo: 1. Use `scf.if` op. 2. Use `cf.cond_br` op. I choose `scf.if` because `scf.if` + canonicalization produces `arith.select` whereas `cf.cond_br` requires scf lifting. In many ways `scf.if` is more high-level and closer to `cir.ternary`. A separate `cir.yield` lowering is required since we cannot directly replace `cir.yield` in the ternary op lowering -- the yield operands may still be illegal and doing so produces `builtin.unrealized_cast` ops. I couldn't figured out a way to solve this issue without adding a separate lowering pattern. Please let me know if you know a way to solve this issue.
eZWALT
pushed a commit
to eZWALT/clangir
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 24, 2024
This PR adds `cir.ternary` lowering. There are two approaches to lower `cir.ternary` imo: 1. Use `scf.if` op. 2. Use `cf.cond_br` op. I choose `scf.if` because `scf.if` + canonicalization produces `arith.select` whereas `cf.cond_br` requires scf lifting. In many ways `scf.if` is more high-level and closer to `cir.ternary`. A separate `cir.yield` lowering is required since we cannot directly replace `cir.yield` in the ternary op lowering -- the yield operands may still be illegal and doing so produces `builtin.unrealized_cast` ops. I couldn't figured out a way to solve this issue without adding a separate lowering pattern. Please let me know if you know a way to solve this issue.
eZWALT
pushed a commit
to eZWALT/clangir
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 24, 2024
This PR adds `cir.ternary` lowering. There are two approaches to lower `cir.ternary` imo: 1. Use `scf.if` op. 2. Use `cf.cond_br` op. I choose `scf.if` because `scf.if` + canonicalization produces `arith.select` whereas `cf.cond_br` requires scf lifting. In many ways `scf.if` is more high-level and closer to `cir.ternary`. A separate `cir.yield` lowering is required since we cannot directly replace `cir.yield` in the ternary op lowering -- the yield operands may still be illegal and doing so produces `builtin.unrealized_cast` ops. I couldn't figured out a way to solve this issue without adding a separate lowering pattern. Please let me know if you know a way to solve this issue.
lanza
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 29, 2024
This PR adds `cir.ternary` lowering. There are two approaches to lower `cir.ternary` imo: 1. Use `scf.if` op. 2. Use `cf.cond_br` op. I choose `scf.if` because `scf.if` + canonicalization produces `arith.select` whereas `cf.cond_br` requires scf lifting. In many ways `scf.if` is more high-level and closer to `cir.ternary`. A separate `cir.yield` lowering is required since we cannot directly replace `cir.yield` in the ternary op lowering -- the yield operands may still be illegal and doing so produces `builtin.unrealized_cast` ops. I couldn't figured out a way to solve this issue without adding a separate lowering pattern. Please let me know if you know a way to solve this issue.
lanza
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 29, 2024
This PR adds `cir.ternary` lowering. There are two approaches to lower `cir.ternary` imo: 1. Use `scf.if` op. 2. Use `cf.cond_br` op. I choose `scf.if` because `scf.if` + canonicalization produces `arith.select` whereas `cf.cond_br` requires scf lifting. In many ways `scf.if` is more high-level and closer to `cir.ternary`. A separate `cir.yield` lowering is required since we cannot directly replace `cir.yield` in the ternary op lowering -- the yield operands may still be illegal and doing so produces `builtin.unrealized_cast` ops. I couldn't figured out a way to solve this issue without adding a separate lowering pattern. Please let me know if you know a way to solve this issue.
eZWALT
pushed a commit
to eZWALT/clangir
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 29, 2024
This PR adds `cir.ternary` lowering. There are two approaches to lower `cir.ternary` imo: 1. Use `scf.if` op. 2. Use `cf.cond_br` op. I choose `scf.if` because `scf.if` + canonicalization produces `arith.select` whereas `cf.cond_br` requires scf lifting. In many ways `scf.if` is more high-level and closer to `cir.ternary`. A separate `cir.yield` lowering is required since we cannot directly replace `cir.yield` in the ternary op lowering -- the yield operands may still be illegal and doing so produces `builtin.unrealized_cast` ops. I couldn't figured out a way to solve this issue without adding a separate lowering pattern. Please let me know if you know a way to solve this issue.
lanza
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 29, 2024
This PR adds `cir.ternary` lowering. There are two approaches to lower `cir.ternary` imo: 1. Use `scf.if` op. 2. Use `cf.cond_br` op. I choose `scf.if` because `scf.if` + canonicalization produces `arith.select` whereas `cf.cond_br` requires scf lifting. In many ways `scf.if` is more high-level and closer to `cir.ternary`. A separate `cir.yield` lowering is required since we cannot directly replace `cir.yield` in the ternary op lowering -- the yield operands may still be illegal and doing so produces `builtin.unrealized_cast` ops. I couldn't figured out a way to solve this issue without adding a separate lowering pattern. Please let me know if you know a way to solve this issue.
bruteforceboy
pushed a commit
to bruteforceboy/clangir
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 2, 2024
This PR adds `cir.ternary` lowering. There are two approaches to lower `cir.ternary` imo: 1. Use `scf.if` op. 2. Use `cf.cond_br` op. I choose `scf.if` because `scf.if` + canonicalization produces `arith.select` whereas `cf.cond_br` requires scf lifting. In many ways `scf.if` is more high-level and closer to `cir.ternary`. A separate `cir.yield` lowering is required since we cannot directly replace `cir.yield` in the ternary op lowering -- the yield operands may still be illegal and doing so produces `builtin.unrealized_cast` ops. I couldn't figured out a way to solve this issue without adding a separate lowering pattern. Please let me know if you know a way to solve this issue.
Hugobros3
pushed a commit
to shady-gang/clangir
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 2, 2024
This PR adds `cir.ternary` lowering. There are two approaches to lower `cir.ternary` imo: 1. Use `scf.if` op. 2. Use `cf.cond_br` op. I choose `scf.if` because `scf.if` + canonicalization produces `arith.select` whereas `cf.cond_br` requires scf lifting. In many ways `scf.if` is more high-level and closer to `cir.ternary`. A separate `cir.yield` lowering is required since we cannot directly replace `cir.yield` in the ternary op lowering -- the yield operands may still be illegal and doing so produces `builtin.unrealized_cast` ops. I couldn't figured out a way to solve this issue without adding a separate lowering pattern. Please let me know if you know a way to solve this issue.
keryell
pushed a commit
to keryell/clangir
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 19, 2024
This PR adds `cir.ternary` lowering. There are two approaches to lower `cir.ternary` imo: 1. Use `scf.if` op. 2. Use `cf.cond_br` op. I choose `scf.if` because `scf.if` + canonicalization produces `arith.select` whereas `cf.cond_br` requires scf lifting. In many ways `scf.if` is more high-level and closer to `cir.ternary`. A separate `cir.yield` lowering is required since we cannot directly replace `cir.yield` in the ternary op lowering -- the yield operands may still be illegal and doing so produces `builtin.unrealized_cast` ops. I couldn't figured out a way to solve this issue without adding a separate lowering pattern. Please let me know if you know a way to solve this issue.
lanza
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 5, 2024
This PR adds `cir.ternary` lowering. There are two approaches to lower `cir.ternary` imo: 1. Use `scf.if` op. 2. Use `cf.cond_br` op. I choose `scf.if` because `scf.if` + canonicalization produces `arith.select` whereas `cf.cond_br` requires scf lifting. In many ways `scf.if` is more high-level and closer to `cir.ternary`. A separate `cir.yield` lowering is required since we cannot directly replace `cir.yield` in the ternary op lowering -- the yield operands may still be illegal and doing so produces `builtin.unrealized_cast` ops. I couldn't figured out a way to solve this issue without adding a separate lowering pattern. Please let me know if you know a way to solve this issue.
lanza
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 18, 2025
This PR adds `cir.ternary` lowering. There are two approaches to lower `cir.ternary` imo: 1. Use `scf.if` op. 2. Use `cf.cond_br` op. I choose `scf.if` because `scf.if` + canonicalization produces `arith.select` whereas `cf.cond_br` requires scf lifting. In many ways `scf.if` is more high-level and closer to `cir.ternary`. A separate `cir.yield` lowering is required since we cannot directly replace `cir.yield` in the ternary op lowering -- the yield operands may still be illegal and doing so produces `builtin.unrealized_cast` ops. I couldn't figured out a way to solve this issue without adding a separate lowering pattern. Please let me know if you know a way to solve this issue.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR adds
cir.ternarylowering. There are two approaches to lowercir.ternaryimo:scf.ifop.cf.cond_brop.I choose
scf.ifbecausescf.if+ canonicalization producesarith.selectwhereascf.cond_brrequires scf lifting. In many waysscf.ifis more high-level and closer tocir.ternary.A separate
cir.yieldlowering is required since we cannot directly replacecir.yieldin the ternary op lowering -- the yield operands may still be illegal and doing so producesbuiltin.unrealized_castops. I couldn't figured out a way to solve this issue without adding a separate lowering pattern. Please let me know if you know a way to solve this issue.