[Mlir-commits] [mlir] [MLIR][Tensor] Canonicalize fully covering slice insertions into tensors with unit prefixes (PR #92912)

[Mehdi Amini]

joker-eph wrote:

> I think we have the same discussion many times. Canonicalizations should be narrow.

Let’s not have the discussion repeatedly and keep it grounded in first principles then please? “Narrow” does not mean anything to me!

Back to first principles: canonicalization is about finding a single form for two equivalent programs.

If you have an expand shape in the input IR: would you do the opposite transformation?



https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92912