[PATCH] D157005: [mlir][ArmSME] Add vector to tile slice op and lowerings

[Andrzej Warzynski via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

awarzynski added inline comments.


================
Comment at: mlir/include/mlir/Dialect/ArmSME/IR/ArmSME.td:417
 
+def VectorToTileSliceOp : ArmSME_Op<"vector_to_tile_slice", [
+    AllTypesMatch<["tile", "result"]>
----------------
c-rhodes wrote:
> awarzynski wrote:
> > Most Ops' names convey what the corresponding "action"/"function" is. Wondering whether this shouldn't be `MoveVectorToTileSliceOp` instead. Naming is hard.
> > Most Ops' names convey what the corresponding "action"/"function" is. Wondering whether this shouldn't be `MoveVectorToTileSliceOp` instead. Naming is hard.
> 
> are you suggesting to rename it both internally and externally (i.e. `move_vector_to_tile_slice`) or just the former?
I was thinking both.


================
Comment at: mlir/include/mlir/Dialect/ArmSME/IR/ArmSME.td:424
+    (2-D scalable vector) slice at the given index. The 1-D vector type must
+    match the inner vector type of the 2-D vector type that represents the
+    tile. The updated tile is returned as the result.
----------------
c-rhodes wrote:
> dcaballe wrote:
> > -> element type?
> > -> element type?
> 
> For a 2-d scalable vector such as `vector<[4]x[4]xi32>` is the element type `vector<[4]xi32>`? That's what I want to express here but I do struggle with these descriptions. FWIW `getElementType()` returns the scalar `i32`. Perhaps `The 1-D vector type must match the vector type of the inner dimension of the 2-D vector type`?
I also though that you meant the element type here, as in e.g. `i32` or `f32`.

I think that we need to be more explicit here:

> The type of the 1-d scalable vector to be moved must match the type of the tile slice (note that 1 slice is effectively 1 row in a virtual tile).

WDYT?


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D157005/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D157005