[MLIR][CF] Fix cf.switch parsing with result numbers

[Kuree]

This PR should fix the parsing bug reported in #87430. It allows using result number as the cf.switch operand. I'm not sure if a lit test is required since the change is small, but I'm happy to add if required.

[github-actions]

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 @ followed by their GitHub username.

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.

[llvmbot]

@llvm/pr-subscribers-mlir

Author: Keyi Zhang (Kuree)

Changes

This PR should fix the parsing bug reported in #87430. It allows using result number as the cf.switch operand. I'm not sure if a lit test is required since the change is small, but I'm happy to add if required.

---

Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/87658.diff

1 Files Affected:

• (modified) mlir/lib/Dialect/ControlFlow/IR/ControlFlowOps.cpp (+2-2)

diff --git a/mlir/lib/Dialect/ControlFlow/IR/ControlFlowOps.cpp b/mlir/lib/Dialect/ControlFlow/IR/ControlFlowOps.cpp
index 5d11f8f6cc458b..1320db3f9e5431 100644
--- a/mlir/lib/Dialect/ControlFlow/IR/ControlFlowOps.cpp
+++ b/mlir/lib/Dialect/ControlFlow/IR/ControlFlowOps.cpp
@@ -531,8 +531,8 @@ static ParseResult parseSwitchOpCases(
         failed(parser.parseSuccessor(destination)))
       return failure();
     if (succeeded(parser.parseOptionalLParen())) {
-      if (failed(parser.parseOperandList(operands, OpAsmParser::Delimiter::None,
-                                         /*allowResultNumber=*/false)) ||
+      if (failed(parser.parseOperandList(operands,
+                                         OpAsmParser::Delimiter::None)) ||
           failed(parser.parseColonTypeList(operandTypes)) ||
           failed(parser.parseRParen()))
         return failure();

[llvmbot]

@llvm/pr-subscribers-mlir-cf

Author: Keyi Zhang (Kuree)

Changes

This PR should fix the parsing bug reported in #87430. It allows using result number as the cf.switch operand. I'm not sure if a lit test is required since the change is small, but I'm happy to add if required.

---

Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/87658.diff

1 Files Affected:

• (modified) mlir/lib/Dialect/ControlFlow/IR/ControlFlowOps.cpp (+2-2)

diff --git a/mlir/lib/Dialect/ControlFlow/IR/ControlFlowOps.cpp b/mlir/lib/Dialect/ControlFlow/IR/ControlFlowOps.cpp
index 5d11f8f6cc458b..1320db3f9e5431 100644
--- a/mlir/lib/Dialect/ControlFlow/IR/ControlFlowOps.cpp
+++ b/mlir/lib/Dialect/ControlFlow/IR/ControlFlowOps.cpp
@@ -531,8 +531,8 @@ static ParseResult parseSwitchOpCases(
         failed(parser.parseSuccessor(destination)))
       return failure();
     if (succeeded(parser.parseOptionalLParen())) {
-      if (failed(parser.parseOperandList(operands, OpAsmParser::Delimiter::None,
-                                         /*allowResultNumber=*/false)) ||
+      if (failed(parser.parseOperandList(operands,
+                                         OpAsmParser::Delimiter::None)) ||
           failed(parser.parseColonTypeList(operandTypes)) ||
           failed(parser.parseRParen()))
         return failure();

[joker-eph]

Thanks! Can you please add a minimal test for it?

[Kuree]

Sure thing! What's the easiest way to have an op that creates two results? I'm thinking of either using unregistered op or using builtin dialect ops such as arith.mulsi_extended. Either way is not perfect in my opinion.

[joker-eph]

What's the easiest way to have an op that creates two results? I'

%result:2 = "test.op_with_two_results() : () -> (i32, i32)

[github-actions]

@Kuree 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!