[MLIR] Extend MPI dialect #123255
[MLIR] Extend MPI dialect #123255
Conversation
|
Thank you for submitting a Pull Request (PR) to the LLVM Project! This PR will be automatically labeled and the relevant teams will be notified. If you wish to, you can add reviewers by using the "Reviewers" section on this page. If this is not working for you, it is probably because you do not have write permissions for the repository. In which case you can instead tag reviewers by name in a comment by using If you have received no comments on your PR for a week, you can request a review by "ping"ing the PR by adding a comment “Ping”. The common courtesy "ping" rate is once a week. Please remember that you are asking for valuable time from other developers. If you have further questions, they may be answered by the LLVM GitHub User Guide. You can also ask questions in a comment on this PR, on the LLVM Discord or on the forums. |
|
@mofeing I think you need to have at least some round trip IR tests |
| // ISendOp | ||
| //===----------------------------------------------------------------------===// | ||
|
|
||
| // TODO what about request handler? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Conceptually, it should be a result of this op.
There are also some quirks of the design that this inherits from existing op that I'd model differently, but that's alright for now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've added it as result. The question is whether we should add MPI_Request_free as an op.
| Optional<MPI_Comm> : $comm | ||
| ); | ||
|
|
||
| let regions = (region SizedRegion<1>:$op); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@tobiasgrosser is there some way to impose a trait to input regions? speaking with @vchuravy, he suggested that we might need the region (that implements the MPI op) to be "pure"; i.e. independent from the whatever is above the region.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You add IsolatedFromAbove to the traits of an Op.
|
@tobiasgrosser all green! |
|
@tobiasgrosser Looks good to me. Since all CI passes, it should be good to go. |
|
@mofeing Congratulations on having your first Pull Request (PR) merged into the LLVM Project! Your changes will be combined with recent changes from other authors, then tested by our build bots. If there is a problem with a build, you may receive a report in an email or a comment on this PR. Please check whether problems have been caused by your change specifically, as the builds can include changes from many authors. It is not uncommon for your change to be included in a build that fails due to someone else's changes, or infrastructure issues. How to do this, and the rest of the post-merge process, is covered in detail here. If your change does cause a problem, it may be reverted, or you can revert it yourself. This is a normal part of LLVM development. You can fix your changes and open a new PR to merge them again. If you don't get any reports, no action is required from you. Your changes are working as expected, well done! |
cc @tobiasgrosser @wsmoses
this PR adds some new ops and types to the MLIR MPI dialect. the goal is to get the minimum required ops here to get a project of us working, and if everything works well, continue adding ops to the mpi dialect on subsequent PRs until we achieve some level of compliance with the MPI standard.
Things left to do in subsequent PRs:
mpi.commtype and add as optional argument of current implemented ops that should support it (i.e.send,recv,isend,irecv,allreduce,barrier).MPI_Ops (the MPI operations, not the tablegenMPI_Op) as regions.