Unify DataInst and Node (removing NodeKind::Block in the process).#33
Draft
eddyb wants to merge 6 commits intoeddyb/post-rust-gpu-0.10from
Draft
Unify DataInst and Node (removing NodeKind::Block in the process).#33eddyb wants to merge 6 commits intoeddyb/post-rust-gpu-0.10from
DataInst and Node (removing NodeKind::Block in the process).#33eddyb wants to merge 6 commits intoeddyb/post-rust-gpu-0.10from
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Note: this PR is a draft to avoid accidental merging onto its "base" branch (used as a form of ad-hoc PR stacking), and will remain as such, until its "base" branch can be set to
main, i.e. all prerequisite PRs will have landed.This PR removes the distinction between
DataInstandNode(formerlyControlNode), and theNodeKind::Blockcontainer forDataInst(flattening them into the parentRegionof the "block"Node, instead).The distinction was purely artificial, and mainly guided by remaining close to SPIR-V wherever possible, but SPIR-V blocks are already regenerated (in
spv::lift) from sequences of instructions chained by linear control-flow, so there is no significant benefit to keeping theDataInstsplit (or their "block" containers).Keeping only "regions" and "nodes" also aligns better with RVSDG (where SPIR-T gets those concepts from).
TODO: finish node-vs-node-output attribute handling, remove the
DataInst/DataInstDef/DataInstKindaliases from these commits and future ones (along with the naming style ofinst, however convenient it may have been).