[Mlir-commits] [mlir] [MLIR][XeGPU] Remove the transpose attribte from Gather/Scatter ops and Cleanup the documents (PR #145389)

[Charitha Saumya]

================
@@ -213,6 +213,37 @@ static LayoutInfo getDefaultSIMTLayoutInfo(VectorType vectorTy) {
                     LaneData({1, packingFactor}));
 }
 
+/// Helper to get the default layout for a vector type.
+static LayoutInfo getDefaultSIMTLayoutInfo(xegpu::TensorDescType tdescTy) {
+  // Expecting a 1D or 2D vector.
+  assert((tdescTy.getRank() == 1 || tdescTy.getRank() == 2) &&
+         "Expected 1D or 2D TensorDesc.");
+  // Expecting int or float element type.
+  assert(tdescTy.getElementType().isIntOrFloat() &&
+         "Expected int or float element type.");
+  // If the rank is 1, then return default layout for 1D vector.
+  if (tdescTy.getRank() == 1)
+    return getDefaultSIMTLayoutInfo(1);
+  // Packing factor is determined by the element type bitwidth.
+  unsigned bitwidth = tdescTy.getElementType().getIntOrFloatBitWidth();
+
+  if (tdescTy.isScattered()) {
+    int packingFactor =
+        bitwidth < xegpu::targetinfo::packedSizeInBitsForGatherScatter
+            ? xegpu::targetinfo::packedSizeInBitsForGatherScatter / bitwidth
+            : 1;
+    return LayoutInfo(LaneLayout({xegpu::targetinfo::subgroupSize, 1}),
+                      LaneData({1, packingFactor}));
+  }
----------------
charithaintc wrote:

any reason for hard coding the layout here? I feel like this should still take the consumer's layout. making the layouts consistent should be done at conflict resolution stage. 

We can remove any bad examples (with layout conflicts) if that is the reason for doing this. 

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/145389