[mlir][Interfaces] Split successor inputs from region successor#175815
Merged
matthias-springer merged 1 commit intomainfrom Jan 16, 2026
Merged
[mlir][Interfaces] Split successor inputs from region successor#175815matthias-springer merged 1 commit intomainfrom
matthias-springer merged 1 commit intomainfrom
Conversation
4976ae4 to
792ea47
Compare
Base automatically changed from
users/matthias-springer/region_successor
to
main
January 14, 2026 09:57
792ea47 to
6feec83
Compare
🐧 Linux x64 Test Results
✅ The build succeeded and all tests passed. |
6b144e4 to
072b98c
Compare
f09ea5a to
cc13c77
Compare
zero9178
approved these changes
Jan 14, 2026
Member
zero9178
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM, but please give it a few days for others to review as well
cc13c77 to
bf8c119
Compare
| branch->getResults().slice(firstIndex, inputs.size())), | ||
| lattices, firstIndex); | ||
| branch, RegionSuccessor::parent(), | ||
| branch->getResults().slice(firstIndex, inputs.size()), lattices, |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could we avoid adding an extra argument to visitNonControlFlowArgumentsImpl?"Since this PR implements getSuccessorInputs, I think we could potentially leverage it in the subsequent call.
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe. I am trying to do that here: #175978. But I don't know that part of the code base well enough. I'm not sure if that's safe.
This PR is already large enough, so I wanted to limit the changes to the "mechanical" ones, for which we can for sure say that they are correct. Then improve that API (and maybe others) in a follow-up commit.
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see, thanks. I've approved it.😉
bf8c119 to
3b1d7ed
Compare
|
LLVM Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder Full details are available at: https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/140/builds/37130 Here is the relevant piece of the build log for the reference |
matthias-springer
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 16, 2026
matthias-springer
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 16, 2026
Fix this build error, which is reported by some compilers after #175815: ``` error: operands to ?: have different types ‘mlir::Operation::result_range {aka mlir::ResultRange}’ and ‘mlir::ValueRange’ return successor.isParent() ? getOperation()->getResults() : ValueRange(); ```
kkwli
pushed a commit
to kkwli/llvm-project
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 16, 2026
…#175815) This commit simplifies the design of the `RegionBranchOpInterface`. The property of being a successor input is now independent of the region branch point. There is a new API for querying successor inputs: `RegionBranchOpInterface::getSuccessorInputs(RegionSuccessor)`. Note that this function does **not** take a `RegionBranchPoint` as parameter. The `RegionSuccessor` API is now also simpler: it no longer stores successor inputs. A region successor is simply `Region *`, wrapped around a convenience API. Note: This commit is mostly mechanical. Analyses / transformations that build on top of the `RegionBranchOpInterface` (e.g., `visitNonControlFlowArguments` API) can likely be simplified in follow-up commits. Note for LLVM integration: Split `RegionBranchOpInterface::getSuccessorRegion` implementations into two functions: `getSuccessorRegion` and `getSuccessorInputs. (There are many examples in this commit.) RFC: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-simplify-regionbranchopinterface-separate-successor-inputs-from-region-successor/89420/7
kkwli
pushed a commit
to kkwli/llvm-project
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 16, 2026
Fix this build error, which is reported by some compilers after llvm#175815: ``` error: operands to ?: have different types ‘mlir::Operation::result_range {aka mlir::ResultRange}’ and ‘mlir::ValueRange’ return successor.isParent() ? getOperation()->getResults() : ValueRange(); ```
Priyanshu3820
pushed a commit
to Priyanshu3820/llvm-project
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 18, 2026
…#175815) This commit simplifies the design of the `RegionBranchOpInterface`. The property of being a successor input is now independent of the region branch point. There is a new API for querying successor inputs: `RegionBranchOpInterface::getSuccessorInputs(RegionSuccessor)`. Note that this function does **not** take a `RegionBranchPoint` as parameter. The `RegionSuccessor` API is now also simpler: it no longer stores successor inputs. A region successor is simply `Region *`, wrapped around a convenience API. Note: This commit is mostly mechanical. Analyses / transformations that build on top of the `RegionBranchOpInterface` (e.g., `visitNonControlFlowArguments` API) can likely be simplified in follow-up commits. Note for LLVM integration: Split `RegionBranchOpInterface::getSuccessorRegion` implementations into two functions: `getSuccessorRegion` and `getSuccessorInputs. (There are many examples in this commit.) RFC: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-simplify-regionbranchopinterface-separate-successor-inputs-from-region-successor/89420/7
Priyanshu3820
pushed a commit
to Priyanshu3820/llvm-project
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 18, 2026
Fix this build error, which is reported by some compilers after llvm#175815: ``` error: operands to ?: have different types ‘mlir::Operation::result_range {aka mlir::ResultRange}’ and ‘mlir::ValueRange’ return successor.isParent() ? getOperation()->getResults() : ValueRange(); ```
praveen-g-ctt
pushed a commit
to llvm/torch-mlir
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 21, 2026
Integrate llvm at 3ca2a5fc0b84762f0e7d8a0e613fd69f7e344219 This includes the **RegionBranchOpInterface** related changes from llvm/llvm-project#175815
amd-eochoalo
added a commit
to iree-org/iree
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 22, 2026
This reverts commit 8ca6c8f13398c5bbe961e9bc874d6b3de398e5e8. Also uses `visitNonControlFlowArguments` new API since llvm/llvm-project#175815
BStott6
pushed a commit
to BStott6/llvm-project
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 22, 2026
…#175815) This commit simplifies the design of the `RegionBranchOpInterface`. The property of being a successor input is now independent of the region branch point. There is a new API for querying successor inputs: `RegionBranchOpInterface::getSuccessorInputs(RegionSuccessor)`. Note that this function does **not** take a `RegionBranchPoint` as parameter. The `RegionSuccessor` API is now also simpler: it no longer stores successor inputs. A region successor is simply `Region *`, wrapped around a convenience API. Note: This commit is mostly mechanical. Analyses / transformations that build on top of the `RegionBranchOpInterface` (e.g., `visitNonControlFlowArguments` API) can likely be simplified in follow-up commits. Note for LLVM integration: Split `RegionBranchOpInterface::getSuccessorRegion` implementations into two functions: `getSuccessorRegion` and `getSuccessorInputs. (There are many examples in this commit.) RFC: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-simplify-regionbranchopinterface-separate-successor-inputs-from-region-successor/89420/7
BStott6
pushed a commit
to BStott6/llvm-project
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 22, 2026
Fix this build error, which is reported by some compilers after llvm#175815: ``` error: operands to ?: have different types ‘mlir::Operation::result_range {aka mlir::ResultRange}’ and ‘mlir::ValueRange’ return successor.isParent() ? getOperation()->getResults() : ValueRange(); ```
keshavvinayak01
pushed a commit
to iree-org/iree
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 27, 2026
This reverts commit 8ca6c8f13398c5bbe961e9bc874d6b3de398e5e8. Also uses `visitNonControlFlowArguments` new API since llvm/llvm-project#175815 Signed-off-by: Keshav Vinayak Jha <keshavvinayakjha@gmail.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This commit simplifies the design of the
RegionBranchOpInterface. The property of being a successor input is now independent of the region branch point.There is a new API for querying successor inputs:
RegionBranchOpInterface::getSuccessorInputs(RegionSuccessor). Note that this function does not take aRegionBranchPointas parameter.The
RegionSuccessorAPI is now also simpler: it no longer stores successor inputs. A region successor is simplyRegion *, wrapped around a convenience API.Note: This commit is mostly mechanical. Analyses / transformations that build on top of the
RegionBranchOpInterface(e.g.,visitNonControlFlowArgumentsAPI) can likely be simplified in follow-up commits.Note for LLVM integration: Split
RegionBranchOpInterface::getSuccessorRegionimplementations into two functions:getSuccessorRegionand `getSuccessorInputs. (There are many examples in this commit.)RFC: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-simplify-regionbranchopinterface-separate-successor-inputs-from-region-successor/89420/7