Closed skatrak closed 3 weeks ago
Can we use a different name than omp.canonical_loop
(or propose a new name for what we will use to create a CanonicalLoopInfo)? I fear that when we eventually introduce the final omp.canonical_loop
we would have to fight a lot of non-obvious conflicts of two operations with the same name, even if only the working branches of the final omp.canonical_loop
merges the last top-of-free from trunk. With a different name, both can coexist (for a while) until final omp.canonical_loop
reaches parity with the stopgap solution.
That's a good point, using another name to avoid conflicts during the transition, if we follow this approach, makes sense.
Features in this PR already landed via merge from main.
This patch introduces the
omp.loopnest
MLIR operation, which contains the information of a rectangular collapsed loop nest. It mirrors the existing representation ofomp.wsloop
,omp.simdloop
andomp.taskloop
, with the intent of removing loop information from these in a subsequent patch.This representation is a temporary solution that does not address loop transformations. That is the goal of the
omp.canonical_loop
discussion.