Files
llvm-project/mlir/lib/Bindings/Python/IRInterfaces.cpp

Ignoring revisions in .git-blame-ignore-revs. Click here to bypass and see the normal blame view.

483 lines
18 KiB
C++
Raw Permalink Normal View History

//===- IRInterfaces.cpp - MLIR IR interfaces pybind -----------------------===//
//
// Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM Exceptions.
// See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
// SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception
//
//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
#include <cstdint>
#include <optional>
#include <string>
#include <utility>
#include <vector>
#include "IRModule.h"
#include "mlir-c/BuiltinAttributes.h"
#include "mlir-c/IR.h"
#include "mlir-c/Interfaces.h"
#include "mlir-c/Support.h"
#include "mlir/Bindings/Python/Nanobind.h"
#include "llvm/ADT/STLExtras.h"
#include "llvm/ADT/SmallVector.h"
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
namespace nb = nanobind;
namespace mlir {
namespace python {
constexpr static const char *constructorDoc =
R"(Creates an interface from a given operation/opview object or from a
subclass of OpView. Raises ValueError if the operation does not implement the
interface.)";
constexpr static const char *operationDoc =
R"(Returns an Operation for which the interface was constructed.)";
constexpr static const char *opviewDoc =
R"(Returns an OpView subclass _instance_ for which the interface was
constructed)";
constexpr static const char *inferReturnTypesDoc =
R"(Given the arguments required to build an operation, attempts to infer
its return types. Raises ValueError on failure.)";
constexpr static const char *inferReturnTypeComponentsDoc =
R"(Given the arguments required to build an operation, attempts to infer
its return shaped type components. Raises ValueError on failure.)";
namespace {
/// Takes in an optional ist of operands and converts them into a SmallVector
/// of MlirVlaues. Returns an empty SmallVector if the list is empty.
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
llvm::SmallVector<MlirValue> wrapOperands(std::optional<nb::list> operandList) {
llvm::SmallVector<MlirValue> mlirOperands;
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
if (!operandList || operandList->size() == 0) {
return mlirOperands;
}
// Note: as the list may contain other lists this may not be final size.
mlirOperands.reserve(operandList->size());
for (const auto &&it : llvm::enumerate(*operandList)) {
if (it.value().is_none())
continue;
PyValue *val;
try {
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
val = nb::cast<PyValue *>(it.value());
if (!val)
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
throw nb::cast_error();
mlirOperands.push_back(val->get());
continue;
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
} catch (nb::cast_error &err) {
// Intentionally unhandled to try sequence below first.
(void)err;
}
try {
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
auto vals = nb::cast<nb::sequence>(it.value());
for (nb::handle v : vals) {
try {
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
val = nb::cast<PyValue *>(v);
if (!val)
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
throw nb::cast_error();
mlirOperands.push_back(val->get());
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
} catch (nb::cast_error &err) {
throw nb::value_error(
(llvm::Twine("Operand ") + llvm::Twine(it.index()) +
" must be a Value or Sequence of Values (" + err.what() + ")")
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
.str()
.c_str());
}
}
continue;
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
} catch (nb::cast_error &err) {
throw nb::value_error((llvm::Twine("Operand ") + llvm::Twine(it.index()) +
" must be a Value or Sequence of Values (" +
err.what() + ")")
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
.str()
.c_str());
}
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
throw nb::cast_error();
}
return mlirOperands;
}
/// Takes in an optional vector of PyRegions and returns a SmallVector of
/// MlirRegion. Returns an empty SmallVector if the list is empty.
llvm::SmallVector<MlirRegion>
wrapRegions(std::optional<std::vector<PyRegion>> regions) {
llvm::SmallVector<MlirRegion> mlirRegions;
if (regions) {
mlirRegions.reserve(regions->size());
for (PyRegion &region : *regions) {
mlirRegions.push_back(region);
}
}
return mlirRegions;
}
} // namespace
/// CRTP base class for Python classes representing MLIR Op interfaces.
/// Interface hierarchies are flat so no base class is expected here. The
/// derived class is expected to define the following static fields:
/// - `const char *pyClassName` - the name of the Python class to create;
/// - `GetTypeIDFunctionTy getInterfaceID` - the function producing the TypeID
/// of the interface.
/// Derived classes may redefine the `bindDerived(ClassTy &)` method to bind
/// interface-specific methods.
///
/// An interface class may be constructed from either an Operation/OpView object
/// or from a subclass of OpView. In the latter case, only the static interface
/// methods are available, similarly to calling ConcereteOp::staticMethod on the
/// C++ side. Implementations of concrete interfaces can use the `isStatic`
/// method to check whether the interface object was constructed from a class or
/// an operation/opview instance. The `getOpName` always succeeds and returns a
/// canonical name of the operation suitable for lookups.
template <typename ConcreteIface>
class PyConcreteOpInterface {
protected:
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
using ClassTy = nb::class_<ConcreteIface>;
using GetTypeIDFunctionTy = MlirTypeID (*)();
public:
/// Constructs an interface instance from an object that is either an
/// operation or a subclass of OpView. In the latter case, only the static
/// methods of the interface are accessible to the caller.
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
PyConcreteOpInterface(nb::object object, DefaultingPyMlirContext context)
: obj(std::move(object)) {
try {
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
operation = &nb::cast<PyOperation &>(obj);
} catch (nb::cast_error &) {
// Do nothing.
}
try {
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
operation = &nb::cast<PyOpView &>(obj).getOperation();
} catch (nb::cast_error &) {
// Do nothing.
}
if (operation != nullptr) {
if (!mlirOperationImplementsInterface(*operation,
ConcreteIface::getInterfaceID())) {
std::string msg = "the operation does not implement ";
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
throw nb::value_error((msg + ConcreteIface::pyClassName).c_str());
}
MlirIdentifier identifier = mlirOperationGetName(*operation);
MlirStringRef stringRef = mlirIdentifierStr(identifier);
opName = std::string(stringRef.data, stringRef.length);
} else {
try {
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
opName = nb::cast<std::string>(obj.attr("OPERATION_NAME"));
} catch (nb::cast_error &) {
throw nb::type_error(
"Op interface does not refer to an operation or OpView class");
}
if (!mlirOperationImplementsInterfaceStatic(
mlirStringRefCreate(opName.data(), opName.length()),
context.resolve().get(), ConcreteIface::getInterfaceID())) {
std::string msg = "the operation does not implement ";
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
throw nb::value_error((msg + ConcreteIface::pyClassName).c_str());
}
}
}
/// Creates the Python bindings for this class in the given module.
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
static void bind(nb::module_ &m) {
nb::class_<ConcreteIface> cls(m, ConcreteIface::pyClassName);
cls.def(nb::init<nb::object, DefaultingPyMlirContext>(), nb::arg("object"),
nb::arg("context").none() = nb::none(), constructorDoc)
.def_prop_ro("operation", &PyConcreteOpInterface::getOperationObject,
operationDoc)
.def_prop_ro("opview", &PyConcreteOpInterface::getOpView, opviewDoc);
ConcreteIface::bindDerived(cls);
}
/// Hook for derived classes to add class-specific bindings.
static void bindDerived(ClassTy &cls) {}
/// Returns `true` if this object was constructed from a subclass of OpView
/// rather than from an operation instance.
bool isStatic() { return operation == nullptr; }
/// Returns the operation instance from which this object was constructed.
/// Throws a type error if this object was constructed from a subclass of
/// OpView.
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
nb::object getOperationObject() {
if (operation == nullptr) {
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
throw nb::type_error("Cannot get an operation from a static interface");
}
return operation->getRef().releaseObject();
}
/// Returns the opview of the operation instance from which this object was
/// constructed. Throws a type error if this object was constructed form a
/// subclass of OpView.
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
nb::object getOpView() {
if (operation == nullptr) {
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
throw nb::type_error("Cannot get an opview from a static interface");
}
return operation->createOpView();
}
/// Returns the canonical name of the operation this interface is constructed
/// from.
const std::string &getOpName() { return opName; }
private:
PyOperation *operation = nullptr;
std::string opName;
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
nb::object obj;
};
/// Python wrapper for InferTypeOpInterface. This interface has only static
/// methods.
class PyInferTypeOpInterface
: public PyConcreteOpInterface<PyInferTypeOpInterface> {
public:
using PyConcreteOpInterface<PyInferTypeOpInterface>::PyConcreteOpInterface;
constexpr static const char *pyClassName = "InferTypeOpInterface";
constexpr static GetTypeIDFunctionTy getInterfaceID =
&mlirInferTypeOpInterfaceTypeID;
/// C-style user-data structure for type appending callback.
struct AppendResultsCallbackData {
std::vector<PyType> &inferredTypes;
PyMlirContext &pyMlirContext;
};
/// Appends the types provided as the two first arguments to the user-data
/// structure (expects AppendResultsCallbackData).
static void appendResultsCallback(intptr_t nTypes, MlirType *types,
void *userData) {
auto *data = static_cast<AppendResultsCallbackData *>(userData);
data->inferredTypes.reserve(data->inferredTypes.size() + nTypes);
for (intptr_t i = 0; i < nTypes; ++i) {
data->inferredTypes.emplace_back(data->pyMlirContext.getRef(), types[i]);
}
}
/// Given the arguments required to build an operation, attempts to infer its
/// return types. Throws value_error on failure.
std::vector<PyType>
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
inferReturnTypes(std::optional<nb::list> operandList,
Introduce MLIR Op Properties This new features enabled to dedicate custom storage inline within operations. This storage can be used as an alternative to attributes to store data that is specific to an operation. Attribute can also be stored inside the properties storage if desired, but any kind of data can be present as well. This offers a way to store and mutate data without uniquing in the Context like Attribute. See the OpPropertiesTest.cpp for an example where a struct with a std::vector<> is attached to an operation and mutated in-place: struct TestProperties { int a = -1; float b = -1.; std::vector<int64_t> array = {-33}; }; More complex scheme (including reference-counting) are also possible. The only constraint to enable storing a C++ object as "properties" on an operation is to implement three functions: - convert from the candidate object to an Attribute - convert from the Attribute to the candidate object - hash the object Optional the parsing and printing can also be customized with 2 extra functions. A new options is introduced to ODS to allow dialects to specify: let usePropertiesForAttributes = 1; When set to true, the inherent attributes for all the ops in this dialect will be using properties instead of being stored alongside discardable attributes. The TestDialect showcases this feature. Another change is that we introduce new APIs on the Operation class to access separately the inherent attributes from the discardable ones. We envision deprecating and removing the `getAttr()`, `getAttrsDictionary()`, and other similar method which don't make the distinction explicit, leading to an entirely separate namespace for discardable attributes. Recommit d572cd1b067f after fixing python bindings build. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D141742
2023-02-26 10:46:01 -05:00
std::optional<PyAttribute> attributes, void *properties,
std::optional<std::vector<PyRegion>> regions,
DefaultingPyMlirContext context,
DefaultingPyLocation location) {
llvm::SmallVector<MlirValue> mlirOperands =
wrapOperands(std::move(operandList));
llvm::SmallVector<MlirRegion> mlirRegions = wrapRegions(std::move(regions));
std::vector<PyType> inferredTypes;
PyMlirContext &pyContext = context.resolve();
AppendResultsCallbackData data{inferredTypes, pyContext};
MlirStringRef opNameRef =
mlirStringRefCreate(getOpName().data(), getOpName().length());
MlirAttribute attributeDict =
attributes ? attributes->get() : mlirAttributeGetNull();
MlirLogicalResult result = mlirInferTypeOpInterfaceInferReturnTypes(
opNameRef, pyContext.get(), location.resolve(), mlirOperands.size(),
Introduce MLIR Op Properties This new features enabled to dedicate custom storage inline within operations. This storage can be used as an alternative to attributes to store data that is specific to an operation. Attribute can also be stored inside the properties storage if desired, but any kind of data can be present as well. This offers a way to store and mutate data without uniquing in the Context like Attribute. See the OpPropertiesTest.cpp for an example where a struct with a std::vector<> is attached to an operation and mutated in-place: struct TestProperties { int a = -1; float b = -1.; std::vector<int64_t> array = {-33}; }; More complex scheme (including reference-counting) are also possible. The only constraint to enable storing a C++ object as "properties" on an operation is to implement three functions: - convert from the candidate object to an Attribute - convert from the Attribute to the candidate object - hash the object Optional the parsing and printing can also be customized with 2 extra functions. A new options is introduced to ODS to allow dialects to specify: let usePropertiesForAttributes = 1; When set to true, the inherent attributes for all the ops in this dialect will be using properties instead of being stored alongside discardable attributes. The TestDialect showcases this feature. Another change is that we introduce new APIs on the Operation class to access separately the inherent attributes from the discardable ones. We envision deprecating and removing the `getAttr()`, `getAttrsDictionary()`, and other similar method which don't make the distinction explicit, leading to an entirely separate namespace for discardable attributes. Recommit d572cd1b067f after fixing python bindings build. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D141742
2023-02-26 10:46:01 -05:00
mlirOperands.data(), attributeDict, properties, mlirRegions.size(),
mlirRegions.data(), &appendResultsCallback, &data);
if (mlirLogicalResultIsFailure(result)) {
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
throw nb::value_error("Failed to infer result types");
}
return inferredTypes;
}
static void bindDerived(ClassTy &cls) {
cls.def("inferReturnTypes", &PyInferTypeOpInterface::inferReturnTypes,
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
nb::arg("operands").none() = nb::none(),
nb::arg("attributes").none() = nb::none(),
nb::arg("properties").none() = nb::none(),
nb::arg("regions").none() = nb::none(),
nb::arg("context").none() = nb::none(),
nb::arg("loc").none() = nb::none(), inferReturnTypesDoc);
}
};
/// Wrapper around an shaped type components.
class PyShapedTypeComponents {
public:
PyShapedTypeComponents(MlirType elementType) : elementType(elementType) {}
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
PyShapedTypeComponents(nb::list shape, MlirType elementType)
: shape(std::move(shape)), elementType(elementType), ranked(true) {}
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
PyShapedTypeComponents(nb::list shape, MlirType elementType,
MlirAttribute attribute)
: shape(std::move(shape)), elementType(elementType), attribute(attribute),
ranked(true) {}
PyShapedTypeComponents(PyShapedTypeComponents &) = delete;
PyShapedTypeComponents(PyShapedTypeComponents &&other) noexcept
: shape(other.shape), elementType(other.elementType),
attribute(other.attribute), ranked(other.ranked) {}
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
static void bind(nb::module_ &m) {
nb::class_<PyShapedTypeComponents>(m, "ShapedTypeComponents")
.def_prop_ro(
"element_type",
[](PyShapedTypeComponents &self) { return self.elementType; },
"Returns the element type of the shaped type components.")
.def_static(
"get",
[](PyType &elementType) {
return PyShapedTypeComponents(elementType);
},
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
nb::arg("element_type"),
"Create an shaped type components object with only the element "
"type.")
.def_static(
"get",
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
[](nb::list shape, PyType &elementType) {
return PyShapedTypeComponents(std::move(shape), elementType);
},
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
nb::arg("shape"), nb::arg("element_type"),
"Create a ranked shaped type components object.")
.def_static(
"get",
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
[](nb::list shape, PyType &elementType, PyAttribute &attribute) {
return PyShapedTypeComponents(std::move(shape), elementType,
attribute);
},
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
nb::arg("shape"), nb::arg("element_type"), nb::arg("attribute"),
"Create a ranked shaped type components object with attribute.")
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
.def_prop_ro(
"has_rank",
[](PyShapedTypeComponents &self) -> bool { return self.ranked; },
"Returns whether the given shaped type component is ranked.")
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
.def_prop_ro(
"rank",
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
[](PyShapedTypeComponents &self) -> nb::object {
if (!self.ranked) {
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
return nb::none();
}
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
return nb::int_(self.shape.size());
},
"Returns the rank of the given ranked shaped type components. If "
"the shaped type components does not have a rank, None is "
"returned.")
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
.def_prop_ro(
"shape",
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
[](PyShapedTypeComponents &self) -> nb::object {
if (!self.ranked) {
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
return nb::none();
}
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
return nb::list(self.shape);
},
"Returns the shape of the ranked shaped type components as a list "
"of integers. Returns none if the shaped type component does not "
"have a rank.");
}
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
nb::object getCapsule();
static PyShapedTypeComponents createFromCapsule(nb::object capsule);
private:
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
nb::list shape;
MlirType elementType;
MlirAttribute attribute;
bool ranked{false};
};
/// Python wrapper for InferShapedTypeOpInterface. This interface has only
/// static methods.
class PyInferShapedTypeOpInterface
: public PyConcreteOpInterface<PyInferShapedTypeOpInterface> {
public:
using PyConcreteOpInterface<
PyInferShapedTypeOpInterface>::PyConcreteOpInterface;
constexpr static const char *pyClassName = "InferShapedTypeOpInterface";
constexpr static GetTypeIDFunctionTy getInterfaceID =
&mlirInferShapedTypeOpInterfaceTypeID;
/// C-style user-data structure for type appending callback.
struct AppendResultsCallbackData {
std::vector<PyShapedTypeComponents> &inferredShapedTypeComponents;
};
/// Appends the shaped type components provided as unpacked shape, element
/// type, attribute to the user-data.
static void appendResultsCallback(bool hasRank, intptr_t rank,
const int64_t *shape, MlirType elementType,
MlirAttribute attribute, void *userData) {
auto *data = static_cast<AppendResultsCallbackData *>(userData);
if (!hasRank) {
data->inferredShapedTypeComponents.emplace_back(elementType);
} else {
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
nb::list shapeList;
for (intptr_t i = 0; i < rank; ++i) {
shapeList.append(shape[i]);
}
data->inferredShapedTypeComponents.emplace_back(shapeList, elementType,
attribute);
}
}
/// Given the arguments required to build an operation, attempts to infer the
/// shaped type components. Throws value_error on failure.
std::vector<PyShapedTypeComponents> inferReturnTypeComponents(
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
std::optional<nb::list> operandList,
std::optional<PyAttribute> attributes, void *properties,
std::optional<std::vector<PyRegion>> regions,
DefaultingPyMlirContext context, DefaultingPyLocation location) {
llvm::SmallVector<MlirValue> mlirOperands =
wrapOperands(std::move(operandList));
llvm::SmallVector<MlirRegion> mlirRegions = wrapRegions(std::move(regions));
std::vector<PyShapedTypeComponents> inferredShapedTypeComponents;
PyMlirContext &pyContext = context.resolve();
AppendResultsCallbackData data{inferredShapedTypeComponents};
MlirStringRef opNameRef =
mlirStringRefCreate(getOpName().data(), getOpName().length());
MlirAttribute attributeDict =
attributes ? attributes->get() : mlirAttributeGetNull();
MlirLogicalResult result = mlirInferShapedTypeOpInterfaceInferReturnTypes(
opNameRef, pyContext.get(), location.resolve(), mlirOperands.size(),
mlirOperands.data(), attributeDict, properties, mlirRegions.size(),
mlirRegions.data(), &appendResultsCallback, &data);
if (mlirLogicalResultIsFailure(result)) {
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
throw nb::value_error("Failed to infer result shape type components");
}
return inferredShapedTypeComponents;
}
static void bindDerived(ClassTy &cls) {
cls.def("inferReturnTypeComponents",
&PyInferShapedTypeOpInterface::inferReturnTypeComponents,
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
nb::arg("operands").none() = nb::none(),
nb::arg("attributes").none() = nb::none(),
nb::arg("regions").none() = nb::none(),
nb::arg("properties").none() = nb::none(),
nb::arg("context").none() = nb::none(),
nb::arg("loc").none() = nb::none(), inferReturnTypeComponentsDoc);
}
};
[mlir python] Port Python core code to nanobind. (#120473) Relands #118583, with a fix for Python 3.8 compatibility. It was not possible to set the buffer protocol accessers via slots in Python 3.8. Why? https://nanobind.readthedocs.io/en/latest/why.html says it better than I can, but my primary motivation for this change is to improve MLIR IR construction time from JAX. For a complicated Google-internal LLM model in JAX, this change improves the MLIR lowering time by around 5s (out of around 30s), which is a significant speedup for simply switching binding frameworks. To a large extent, this is a mechanical change, for instance changing `pybind11::` to `nanobind::`. Notes: * this PR needs Nanobind 2.4.0, because it needs a bug fix (https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind/pull/806) that landed in that release. * this PR does not port the in-tree dialect extension modules. They can be ported in a future PR. * I removed the py::sibling() annotations from def_static and def_class in `PybindAdapters.h`. These ask pybind11 to try to form an overload with an existing method, but it's not possible to form mixed pybind11/nanobind overloads this ways and the parent class is now defined in nanobind. Better solutions may be possible here. * nanobind does not contain an exact equivalent of pybind11's buffer protocol support. It was not hard to add a nanobind implementation of a similar API. * nanobind is pickier about casting to std::vector<bool>, expecting that the input is a sequence of bool types, not truthy values. In a couple of places I added code to support truthy values during casting. * nanobind distinguishes bytes (`nb::bytes`) from strings (e.g., `std::string`). This required nb::bytes overloads in a few places.
2024-12-18 21:55:42 -05:00
void populateIRInterfaces(nb::module_ &m) {
PyInferTypeOpInterface::bind(m);
PyShapedTypeComponents::bind(m);
PyInferShapedTypeOpInterface::bind(m);
}
} // namespace python
} // namespace mlir