-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10.7k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Inconsistent results when using --buffer-deallocation #92056
Labels
Comments
@llvm/issue-subscribers-mlir Author: None (wangyongj1a)
I have the following MLIR program:
test.mlir:
```
module {
func.func @func0(%arg0: tensor<19xi32>) -> (){
%0 = arith.constant 2 : index
%1 = tensor.extract %arg0[%0] : tensor<19xi32>
vector.print %1 : i32
return
}
func.func private @func1() {
%0 = arith.constant 10 : i32
%1 = tensor.from_elements %0 : tensor<1xi32>
%2 = tensor.from_elements %0, %0, %0, %0, %0, %0, %0, %0, %0, %0, %0, %0, %0, %0, %0, %0, %0, %0, %0 : tensor<19xi32>
call @func0(%2) : (tensor<19xi32>) -> ()
return
}
}
```
When I tried to lower the program with ```mlir-opt --tensor-bufferize --buffer-deallocation --convert-scf-to-cf --convert-cf-to-llvm --func-bufferize --convert-func-to-llvm --convert-index-to-llvm --convert-vector-to-llvm --finalize-memref-to-llvm --convert-arith-to-llvm --reconcile-unrealized-casts test.mlir```, and executed the executable file, I got inconsistent results over multiple runs.
I noticed that after using the passes ```--tensor-bufferize --buffer-deallocation```, the program was lowered to:
```
module {
func.func @func0(%arg0: tensor<19xi32>) {
%0 = bufferization.to_memref %arg0 : memref<19xi32>
%c2 = arith.constant 2 : index
%1 = memref.load %0[%c2] : memref<19xi32>
vector.print %1 : i32
return
}
func.func private @func1() {
%c10_i32 = arith.constant 10 : i32
%alloc = memref.alloc() {alignment = 64 : i64} : memref<1xi32>
%c0 = arith.constant 0 : index
memref.store %c10_i32, %alloc[%c0] : memref<1xi32>
memref.dealloc %alloc : memref<1xi32>
%alloc_0 = memref.alloc() {alignment = 64 : i64} : memref<19xi32>
%c0_1 = arith.constant 0 : index
%c1 = arith.constant 1 : index
%c2 = arith.constant 2 : index
%c3 = arith.constant 3 : index
%c4 = arith.constant 4 : index
%c5 = arith.constant 5 : index
%c6 = arith.constant 6 : index
%c7 = arith.constant 7 : index
%c8 = arith.constant 8 : index
%c9 = arith.constant 9 : index
%c10 = arith.constant 10 : index
%c11 = arith.constant 11 : index
%c12 = arith.constant 12 : index
%c13 = arith.constant 13 : index
%c14 = arith.constant 14 : index
%c15 = arith.constant 15 : index
%c16 = arith.constant 16 : index
%c17 = arith.constant 17 : index
%c18 = arith.constant 18 : index
memref.store %c10_i32, %alloc_0[%c0_1] : memref<19xi32>
memref.store %c10_i32, %alloc_0[%c1] : memref<19xi32>
memref.store %c10_i32, %alloc_0[%c2] : memref<19xi32>
memref.store %c10_i32, %alloc_0[%c3] : memref<19xi32>
memref.store %c10_i32, %alloc_0[%c4] : memref<19xi32>
memref.store %c10_i32, %alloc_0[%c5] : memref<19xi32>
memref.store %c10_i32, %alloc_0[%c6] : memref<19xi32>
memref.store %c10_i32, %alloc_0[%c7] : memref<19xi32>
memref.store %c10_i32, %alloc_0[%c8] : memref<19xi32>
memref.store %c10_i32, %alloc_0[%c9] : memref<19xi32>
memref.store %c10_i32, %alloc_0[%c10] : memref<19xi32>
memref.store %c10_i32, %alloc_0[%c11] : memref<19xi32>
memref.store %c10_i32, %alloc_0[%c12] : memref<19xi32>
memref.store %c10_i32, %alloc_0[%c13] : memref<19xi32>
memref.store %c10_i32, %alloc_0[%c14] : memref<19xi32>
memref.store %c10_i32, %alloc_0[%c15] : memref<19xi32>
memref.store %c10_i32, %alloc_0[%c16] : memref<19xi32>
memref.store %c10_i32, %alloc_0[%c17] : memref<19xi32>
memref.store %c10_i32, %alloc_0[%c18] : memref<19xi32>
%0 = bufferization.to_tensor %alloc_0 : memref<19xi32>
memref.dealloc %alloc_0 : memref<19xi32>
call @func0(%0) : (tensor<19xi32>) -> ()
return
}
}
```
The memory of ```%alloc_0``` seems to be deallocated before the related tensor ```%0``` was used as an attribute in the function call. I also tried to use the pass ```--buffer-deallocation-simplification``` after ```--buffer-deallocation```, but it seems couldn't help with this case.
I'm not sure if there is any bug in my program or the wrong usage of ```--buffer-deallocation``` and ```--buffer-deallocation-simplification``` that caused this error.
My git version is 4c79d38.
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
I have the following MLIR program:
test.mlir:
When I tried to lower the program with
mlir-opt --tensor-bufferize --buffer-deallocation --convert-scf-to-cf --convert-cf-to-llvm --func-bufferize --convert-func-to-llvm --convert-index-to-llvm --convert-vector-to-llvm --finalize-memref-to-llvm --convert-arith-to-llvm --reconcile-unrealized-casts test.mlir
, and executed the executable file, I got inconsistent results over multiple runs.I noticed that after using the passes
--tensor-bufferize --buffer-deallocation
, the program was lowered to:The memory of
%alloc_0
seems to be deallocated before the related tensor%0
was used as an attribute in the function call. I also tried to use the pass--buffer-deallocation-simplification
after--buffer-deallocation
, but it seems couldn't help with this case.I'm not sure if there is any bug in my program or the wrong usage of
--buffer-deallocation
and--buffer-deallocation-simplification
that caused this error.My git version is 4c79d38.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: