[Mlir-commits] [llvm] [mlir] [MLIR][Analysis] Consolidate topological sort utilities (PR #92563)

[Christian Ulmann]

================
@@ -202,15 +202,15 @@ func.func @slicing_test() {
   // BWD-NEXT: %[[v8:.*]] = "slicing-test-op"(%[[v5]], %[[v6]]) : (i5, i6) -> i8
   //
   // FWDBWD-NEXT: matched: %[[v9:.*]] {{.*}} static slice:
-  // FWDBWD-DAG: %[[v4:.*]] = "slicing-test-op"() : () -> i4
-  // FWDBWD-DAG: %[[v3:.*]] = "slicing-test-op"() : () -> i3
-  // FWDBWD-NEXT: %[[v6:.*]] = "slicing-test-op"(%[[v3]], %[[v4]]) : (i3, i4) -> i6
-  // FWDBWD-DAG: %[[v2:.*]] = "slicing-test-op"() : () -> i2
-  // FWDBWD-DAG: %[[v1:.*]] = "slicing-test-op"() : () -> i1
-  // FWDBWD-NEXT: %[[v5:.*]] = "slicing-test-op"(%[[v1]], %[[v2]]) : (i1, i2) -> i5
-  // FWDBWD-DAG: %[[v8:.*]] = "slicing-test-op"(%[[v5]], %[[v6]]) : (i5, i6) -> i8
-  // FWDBWD-DAG: %[[v7:.*]] = "slicing-test-op"(%[[v1]], %[[v5]]) : (i1, i5) -> i7
-  // FWDBWD-NEXT: %[[v9:.*]] = "slicing-test-op"(%[[v7]], %[[v8]]) : (i7, i8) -> i9
+  // FWDBWD: %[[v1:.*]] = "slicing-test-op"() : () -> i1
+  // FWDBWD: %[[v2:.*]] = "slicing-test-op"() : () -> i2
+  // FWDBWD: %[[v3:.*]] = "slicing-test-op"() : () -> i3
+  // FWDBWD: %[[v4:.*]] = "slicing-test-op"() : () -> i4
+  // FWDBWD: %[[v5:.*]] = "slicing-test-op"(%[[v1]], %[[v2]]) : (i1, i2) -> i5
+  // FWDBWD: %[[v6:.*]] = "slicing-test-op"(%[[v3]], %[[v4]]) : (i3, i4) -> i6
+  // FWDBWD: %[[v7:.*]] = "slicing-test-op"(%[[v1]], %[[v5]]) : (i1, i5) -> i7
+  // FWDBWD: %[[v8:.*]] = "slicing-test-op"(%[[v5]], %[[v6]]) : (i5, i6) -> i8
+  // FWDBWD: %[[v9:.*]] = "slicing-test-op"(%[[v7]], %[[v8]]) : (i7, i8) -> i9
----------------
Dinistro wrote:

It only used `CHECK-DAG` for some random sub-parts. Now that the underlying implementation is stricter, these checks break.

Sadly, CHECK-DAG cannot be used nicely to check if an output satisfies a topological order, due to reordering of subtrees.  

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92563