[Mlir-commits] [mlir] [mlir][vector] Clarify the semantics of masking maps (PR #111383)

[llvmlistbot at llvm.org]

llvmbot wrote:


<!--LLVM PR SUMMARY COMMENT-->

@llvm/pr-subscribers-mlir

Author: Andrzej Warzyński (banach-space)

<details>
<summary>Changes</summary>

We use the term "masking map" throughout the Linalg vectorization logic,
but we don't really define what it is and how it differs from Linalg
indexing maps. This PR clarifies the differnces, makes sure that the new
terminology is used consistenty and improves code re-use.


---
Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/111383.diff


1 Files Affected:

- (modified) mlir/lib/Dialect/Linalg/Transforms/Vectorization.cpp (+31-13) 


``````````diff
diff --git a/mlir/lib/Dialect/Linalg/Transforms/Vectorization.cpp b/mlir/lib/Dialect/Linalg/Transforms/Vectorization.cpp
index 09c6b2683b4388..dcbdd7264f95ae 100644
--- a/mlir/lib/Dialect/Linalg/Transforms/Vectorization.cpp
+++ b/mlir/lib/Dialect/Linalg/Transforms/Vectorization.cpp
@@ -250,6 +250,32 @@ struct VectorizationState {
                            LinalgOp linalgOp,
                            std::optional<AffineMap> maybeMaskingMap);
 
+  /// Check whether this permutation map can be used for masking. Add the
+  /// moment we only make sure that there are no broadcast dimensions, but this
+  /// might change if indexing maps evolve.
+  bool isValidMaskingMap(AffineMap maskingMap) {
+    return maskingMap.getBroadcastDims().size() == 0;
+  }
+
+  /// Turn the input indexing map into a valid masking map.
+  ///
+  /// The input indexing map may contain "zero" results, e.g.:
+  ///    (d0, d1, d2, d3) -> (d2, d1, d0, 0)
+  /// Applying such maps to canonical vector shapes like this one:
+  ///    (1, 16, 16, 4)
+  /// would yield an invalid vector shape like this:
+  ///    (16, 16, 1, 0)
+  /// Instead, drop the broadcasting dims that make no sense for masking perm.
+  /// maps:
+  ///    (d0, d1, d2, d3) -> (d2, d1, d0)
+  /// This way, the corresponding vector/mask type will be:
+  ///    vector<16x16x1xty>
+  /// rather than this invalid Vector type:
+  ///    vector<16x16x1x0xty>
+  AffineMap getMaskingMapFromIndexingMap(AffineMap &indexingMap) {
+    return indexingMap.dropZeroResults();
+  }
+
   // Holds the compile-time static sizes of the iteration space to vectorize.
   // Dynamic dimensions are represented using ShapedType::kDynamic.
   SmallVector<int64_t> iterSpaceStaticSizes;
@@ -360,6 +386,10 @@ VectorizationState::initState(RewriterBase &rewriter, LinalgOp linalgOp,
 Value VectorizationState::getOrCreateMaskFor(
     RewriterBase &rewriter, Operation *opToMask, LinalgOp linalgOp,
     std::optional<AffineMap> maybeMaskingMap) {
+
+  assert(!maybeMaskingMap ||
+         isValidMaskingMap(*maybeMaskingMap) && "Ill-formed masking map.");
+
   // No mask is needed if the operation is not maskable.
   auto maskableOp = dyn_cast<vector::MaskableOpInterface>(opToMask);
   if (!maskableOp)
@@ -429,20 +459,8 @@ VectorizationState::maskOperation(RewriterBase &rewriter, Operation *opToMask,
   LDBG("Trying to mask: " << *opToMask << "\n");
 
   std::optional<AffineMap> maybeMaskingMap = std::nullopt;
-  // The Operand indexing map may contain "zero" results, e.g.:
-  //    (d0, d1, d2, d3) -> (d0, d1, d2, 0)
-  // When applied to canonical vector shapes like these:
-  //    (1, 16, 16, 4)
-  // we would get:
-  //    (1, 16, 16, 0)
-  // Instead, we should extract the following map permutation map for masking:
-  //    (d0, d1, d2, d3) -> (d0, d1, d2)
-  // This way, the corresponding vector/mask type will be:
-  //    vector<1x16x16xty>
-  // rather than:
-  //    vector<1x16x16x0xty>
   if (maybeIndexingMap)
-    maybeMaskingMap = maybeIndexingMap->dropZeroResults();
+    maybeMaskingMap = getMaskingMapFromIndexingMap(*maybeIndexingMap);
 
   // Create or retrieve mask for this operation.
   Value mask =

``````````

</details>


https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/111383