[mlir][affine] Modify assertion into a user visible diagnostic #136474

Prakhar-Dixit · 2025-04-20T06:45:35Z

Fixes #122227
The loop’s induction variable (%i) is used to compute two different indices via affine.apply.
And the Vectorization Assumption is Violated i.e, Each vectorized loop should contribute at most one non-invariant index.

Minimal example crashing :

#map = affine_map<(d0)[s0] -> (d0 mod s0)>
#map1 = affine_map<(d0)[s0] -> (d0 floordiv s0)>

func.func @single_loop_unrolling_2D_access_pattern(%arg0: index) -> memref<2x2xf32> {
  %c2 = arith.constant 2 : index
  %cst = arith.constant 1.0 : f32
  %alloc = memref.alloc() : memref<2x2xf32>

    affine.for %i = 0 to 4 {
      %row = affine.apply #map1(%i)[%c2]  
      %col = affine.apply #map(%i)[%c2]  
      affine.store %cst, %alloc[%row, %col] : memref<2x2xf32>
    }

    return %alloc : memref<2x2xf32>
  }

The single loop %i contributes two indices (%row and %col) to the 2D memref access.

The permutation map expects one index per vectorized loop dimension, but here one loop (%i) maps to two indices (dim=0 and dim=1).

The code detects this when trying to assign the second index (dim=1) to the same vector dimension (perm[0]).

llvmbot · 2025-04-20T06:46:08Z

@llvm/pr-subscribers-mlir-vector

@llvm/pr-subscribers-mlir

Author: Prakhar Dixit (Prakhar-Dixit)

Changes

Fixes #122227
The loop’s induction variable (%i) is used to compute two different indices via affine.apply.
And the Vectorization Assumption is Violated i.e, Each vectorized loop should contribute at most one non-invariant index.

Minimal example crashing :

#map = affine_map&lt;(d0)[s0] -&gt; (d0 mod s0)&gt;
#map1 = affine_map&lt;(d0)[s0] -&gt; (d0 floordiv s0)&gt;

func.func @<!-- -->single_loop_unrolling_2D_access_pattern(%arg0: index) -&gt; memref&lt;2x2xf32&gt; {
  %c2 = arith.constant 2 : index
  %cst = arith.constant 1.0 : f32
  %alloc = memref.alloc() : memref&lt;2x2xf32&gt;

    affine.for %i = 0 to 4 {
      %row = affine.apply #map1(%i)[%c2]  
      %col = affine.apply #map(%i)[%c2]  
      affine.store %cst, %alloc[%row, %col] : memref&lt;2x2xf32&gt;
    }

    return %alloc : memref&lt;2x2xf32&gt;
  }

The single loop %i contributes two indices (%row and %col) to the 2D memref access.

The permutation map expects one index per vectorized loop dimension, but here one loop (%i) maps to two indices (dim=0 and dim=1).

The code detects this when trying to assign the second index (dim=1) to the same vector dimension (perm[0]).

Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136474.diff

2 Files Affected:

(modified) mlir/lib/Dialect/Vector/Utils/VectorUtils.cpp (+8-2)
(modified) mlir/test/Dialect/Affine/SuperVectorize/vectorize_unsupported.mlir (+35)

diff --git a/mlir/lib/Dialect/Vector/Utils/VectorUtils.cpp b/mlir/lib/Dialect/Vector/Utils/VectorUtils.cpp
index 024e8ccb901de..f15ed4b0d5f84 100644
--- a/mlir/lib/Dialect/Vector/Utils/VectorUtils.cpp
+++ b/mlir/lib/Dialect/Vector/Utils/VectorUtils.cpp
@@ -141,8 +141,14 @@ static AffineMap makePermutationMap(
     unsigned countInvariantIndices = 0;
     for (unsigned dim = 0; dim < numIndices; ++dim) {
       if (!invariants.count(indices[dim])) {
-        assert(perm[kvp.second] == getAffineConstantExpr(0, context) &&
-               "permutationMap already has an entry along dim");
+        if (perm[kvp.second] != getAffineConstantExpr(0, context)) {
+          auto loopOp = cast<affine::AffineForOp>(kvp.first);
+          loopOp->emitError(
+              "loop induction variable is used in multiple indices, which is "
+              "unsupported for vectorization. Consider using nested loops "
+              "instead of a single loop with affine.apply.");
+          return AffineMap();
+        }
         perm[kvp.second] = getAffineDimExpr(dim, context);
       } else {
         ++countInvariantIndices;
diff --git a/mlir/test/Dialect/Affine/SuperVectorize/vectorize_unsupported.mlir b/mlir/test/Dialect/Affine/SuperVectorize/vectorize_unsupported.mlir
index 6c1a7c48c4cb1..c8c009f02212b 100644
--- a/mlir/test/Dialect/Affine/SuperVectorize/vectorize_unsupported.mlir
+++ b/mlir/test/Dialect/Affine/SuperVectorize/vectorize_unsupported.mlir
@@ -9,3 +9,38 @@ func.func @unparallel_loop_reduction_unsupported(%in: memref<256x512xf32>, %out:
  }
  return
 }
+
+// -----
+
+#map = affine_map<(d0)[s0] -> (d0 mod s0)>
+#map1 = affine_map<(d0)[s0] -> (d0 floordiv s0)>
+
+func.func @single_loop_unrolling_2D_access_pattern(%arg0: index) -> memref<2x2xf32> {
+  %c2 = arith.constant 2 : index
+  %cst = arith.constant 1.0 : f32
+  %alloc = memref.alloc() : memref<2x2xf32>
+    
+    affine.for %i = 0 to 4 {
+      %row = affine.apply #map1(%i)[%c2]  
+      %col = affine.apply #map(%i)[%c2]  
+      affine.store %cst, %alloc[%row, %col] : memref<2x2xf32>
+    }
+    
+    return %alloc : memref<2x2xf32>
+  }
+
+// CHECK: #[[$ATTR_0:.+]] = affine_map<(d0)[s0] -> (d0 floordiv s0)>
+// CHECK: #[[$ATTR_1:.+]] = affine_map<(d0)[s0] -> (d0 mod s0)>
+
+// CHECK-LABEL:   func.func @single_loop_unrolling_2D_access_pattern(
+// CHECK-SAME:                            %[[VAL_0:[0-9]+|[a-zA-Z$._-][a-zA-Z0-9$._-]*]]: index) -> memref<2x2xf32> {
+// CHECK:           %[[VAL_1:.*]] = arith.constant 2 : index
+// CHECK:           %[[VAL_2:.*]] = arith.constant 1.000000e+00 : f32
+// CHECK:           %[[VAL_3:.*]] = memref.alloc() : memref<2x2xf32>
+// CHECK:           affine.for %[[VAL_4:.*]] = 0 to 4 {
+// CHECK:             %[[VAL_5:.*]] = affine.apply #[[$ATTR_0]](%[[VAL_4]]){{\[}}%[[VAL_1]]]
+// CHECK:             %[[VAL_6:.*]] = affine.apply #[[$ATTR_1]](%[[VAL_4]]){{\[}}%[[VAL_1]]]
+// CHECK:             affine.store %[[VAL_2]], %[[VAL_3]]{{\[}}%[[VAL_5]], %[[VAL_6]]] : memref<2x2xf32>
+// CHECK:           }
+// CHECK:           return %[[VAL_3]] : memref<2x2xf32>
+// CHECK:         }
\ No newline at end of file

llvmbot · 2025-04-20T06:46:09Z

@llvm/pr-subscribers-mlir-affine

Author: Prakhar Dixit (Prakhar-Dixit)

Changes

Fixes #122227
The loop’s induction variable (%i) is used to compute two different indices via affine.apply.
And the Vectorization Assumption is Violated i.e, Each vectorized loop should contribute at most one non-invariant index.

Minimal example crashing :

#map = affine_map&lt;(d0)[s0] -&gt; (d0 mod s0)&gt;
#map1 = affine_map&lt;(d0)[s0] -&gt; (d0 floordiv s0)&gt;

func.func @<!-- -->single_loop_unrolling_2D_access_pattern(%arg0: index) -&gt; memref&lt;2x2xf32&gt; {
  %c2 = arith.constant 2 : index
  %cst = arith.constant 1.0 : f32
  %alloc = memref.alloc() : memref&lt;2x2xf32&gt;

    affine.for %i = 0 to 4 {
      %row = affine.apply #map1(%i)[%c2]  
      %col = affine.apply #map(%i)[%c2]  
      affine.store %cst, %alloc[%row, %col] : memref&lt;2x2xf32&gt;
    }

    return %alloc : memref&lt;2x2xf32&gt;
  }

The single loop %i contributes two indices (%row and %col) to the 2D memref access.

The permutation map expects one index per vectorized loop dimension, but here one loop (%i) maps to two indices (dim=0 and dim=1).

The code detects this when trying to assign the second index (dim=1) to the same vector dimension (perm[0]).

Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136474.diff

2 Files Affected:

(modified) mlir/lib/Dialect/Vector/Utils/VectorUtils.cpp (+8-2)
(modified) mlir/test/Dialect/Affine/SuperVectorize/vectorize_unsupported.mlir (+35)

diff --git a/mlir/lib/Dialect/Vector/Utils/VectorUtils.cpp b/mlir/lib/Dialect/Vector/Utils/VectorUtils.cpp
index 024e8ccb901de..f15ed4b0d5f84 100644
--- a/mlir/lib/Dialect/Vector/Utils/VectorUtils.cpp
+++ b/mlir/lib/Dialect/Vector/Utils/VectorUtils.cpp
@@ -141,8 +141,14 @@ static AffineMap makePermutationMap(
     unsigned countInvariantIndices = 0;
     for (unsigned dim = 0; dim < numIndices; ++dim) {
       if (!invariants.count(indices[dim])) {
-        assert(perm[kvp.second] == getAffineConstantExpr(0, context) &&
-               "permutationMap already has an entry along dim");
+        if (perm[kvp.second] != getAffineConstantExpr(0, context)) {
+          auto loopOp = cast<affine::AffineForOp>(kvp.first);
+          loopOp->emitError(
+              "loop induction variable is used in multiple indices, which is "
+              "unsupported for vectorization. Consider using nested loops "
+              "instead of a single loop with affine.apply.");
+          return AffineMap();
+        }
         perm[kvp.second] = getAffineDimExpr(dim, context);
       } else {
         ++countInvariantIndices;
diff --git a/mlir/test/Dialect/Affine/SuperVectorize/vectorize_unsupported.mlir b/mlir/test/Dialect/Affine/SuperVectorize/vectorize_unsupported.mlir
index 6c1a7c48c4cb1..c8c009f02212b 100644
--- a/mlir/test/Dialect/Affine/SuperVectorize/vectorize_unsupported.mlir
+++ b/mlir/test/Dialect/Affine/SuperVectorize/vectorize_unsupported.mlir
@@ -9,3 +9,38 @@ func.func @unparallel_loop_reduction_unsupported(%in: memref<256x512xf32>, %out:
  }
  return
 }
+
+// -----
+
+#map = affine_map<(d0)[s0] -> (d0 mod s0)>
+#map1 = affine_map<(d0)[s0] -> (d0 floordiv s0)>
+
+func.func @single_loop_unrolling_2D_access_pattern(%arg0: index) -> memref<2x2xf32> {
+  %c2 = arith.constant 2 : index
+  %cst = arith.constant 1.0 : f32
+  %alloc = memref.alloc() : memref<2x2xf32>
+    
+    affine.for %i = 0 to 4 {
+      %row = affine.apply #map1(%i)[%c2]  
+      %col = affine.apply #map(%i)[%c2]  
+      affine.store %cst, %alloc[%row, %col] : memref<2x2xf32>
+    }
+    
+    return %alloc : memref<2x2xf32>
+  }
+
+// CHECK: #[[$ATTR_0:.+]] = affine_map<(d0)[s0] -> (d0 floordiv s0)>
+// CHECK: #[[$ATTR_1:.+]] = affine_map<(d0)[s0] -> (d0 mod s0)>
+
+// CHECK-LABEL:   func.func @single_loop_unrolling_2D_access_pattern(
+// CHECK-SAME:                            %[[VAL_0:[0-9]+|[a-zA-Z$._-][a-zA-Z0-9$._-]*]]: index) -> memref<2x2xf32> {
+// CHECK:           %[[VAL_1:.*]] = arith.constant 2 : index
+// CHECK:           %[[VAL_2:.*]] = arith.constant 1.000000e+00 : f32
+// CHECK:           %[[VAL_3:.*]] = memref.alloc() : memref<2x2xf32>
+// CHECK:           affine.for %[[VAL_4:.*]] = 0 to 4 {
+// CHECK:             %[[VAL_5:.*]] = affine.apply #[[$ATTR_0]](%[[VAL_4]]){{\[}}%[[VAL_1]]]
+// CHECK:             %[[VAL_6:.*]] = affine.apply #[[$ATTR_1]](%[[VAL_4]]){{\[}}%[[VAL_1]]]
+// CHECK:             affine.store %[[VAL_2]], %[[VAL_3]]{{\[}}%[[VAL_5]], %[[VAL_6]]] : memref<2x2xf32>
+// CHECK:           }
+// CHECK:           return %[[VAL_3]] : memref<2x2xf32>
+// CHECK:         }
\ No newline at end of file

Prakhar-Dixit · 2025-04-20T06:53:47Z

@ftynse

mlir/lib/Dialect/Vector/Utils/VectorUtils.cpp

mlir/lib/Dialect/Affine/Transforms/SuperVectorize.cpp

mlir/test/Dialect/Affine/SuperVectorize/vectorize_unsupported.mlir

Prakhar-Dixit · 2025-04-24T02:50:33Z

Just a gentle reminder!
@joker-eph

mlir/lib/Dialect/Affine/Transforms/SuperVectorize.cpp

mlir/test/Dialect/Affine/SuperVectorize/vectorize_unsupported.mlir

…136474) Fixes llvm#122227 The loop’s induction variable (%i) is used to compute two different indices via affine.apply. And the Vectorization Assumption is Violated i.e, Each vectorized loop should contribute at most one non-invariant index. **Minimal example crashing :** ``` #map = affine_map<(d0)[s0] -> (d0 mod s0)> #map1 = affine_map<(d0)[s0] -> (d0 floordiv s0)> func.func @single_loop_unrolling_2D_access_pattern(%arg0: index) -> memref<2x2xf32> { %c2 = arith.constant 2 : index %cst = arith.constant 1.0 : f32 %alloc = memref.alloc() : memref<2x2xf32> affine.for %i = 0 to 4 { %row = affine.apply #map1(%i)[%c2] %col = affine.apply #map(%i)[%c2] affine.store %cst, %alloc[%row, %col] : memref<2x2xf32> } return %alloc : memref<2x2xf32> } ``` The single loop %i contributes two indices (%row and %col) to the 2D memref access. The permutation map expects one index per vectorized loop dimension, but here one loop (%i) maps to two indices (dim=0 and dim=1). The code detects this when trying to assign the second index (dim=1) to the same vector dimension (perm[0]).

[mlir][affine] Modify assertion into a user visible diagnostic

84157c0

Prakhar-Dixit requested review from banach-space, dcaballe, nicolasvasilache and Groverkss as code owners April 20, 2025 06:45

llvmbot added mlir:affine mlir:vectorops mlir mlir:vector labels Apr 20, 2025

joker-eph reviewed Apr 20, 2025

View reviewed changes

mlir/lib/Dialect/Vector/Utils/VectorUtils.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Prakhar-Dixit added 2 commits April 22, 2025 13:09

Add check to ensure pass fails gracefully

8112d1a

typo fix

24acbf9

Prakhar-Dixit requested a review from joker-eph April 22, 2025 08:19

joker-eph reviewed Apr 22, 2025

View reviewed changes

mlir/lib/Dialect/Affine/Transforms/SuperVectorize.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

joker-eph reviewed Apr 22, 2025

View reviewed changes

mlir/test/Dialect/Affine/SuperVectorize/vectorize_unsupported.mlir Show resolved Hide resolved

mlir/test/Dialect/Affine/SuperVectorize/vectorize_unsupported.mlir Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Create a helper function to avoid code duplication

99f6885

Prakhar-Dixit requested a review from joker-eph April 22, 2025 15:32

ftynse approved these changes Apr 29, 2025

View reviewed changes

Prakhar-Dixit added 2 commits April 30, 2025 11:10

modify code with best practices

2052b9d

modify

827b352

Prakhar-Dixit requested a review from ftynse April 30, 2025 06:15

ftynse approved these changes Apr 30, 2025

View reviewed changes

ftynse merged commit c26db58 into llvm:main Apr 30, 2025
11 checks passed

Prakhar-Dixit deleted the pd/affine-122227 branch May 1, 2025 02:21

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

[mlir][affine] Modify assertion into a user visible diagnostic #136474

[mlir][affine] Modify assertion into a user visible diagnostic #136474

Uh oh!

Prakhar-Dixit commented Apr 20, 2025

Uh oh!

llvmbot commented Apr 20, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

llvmbot commented Apr 20, 2025

Uh oh!

Prakhar-Dixit commented Apr 20, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Prakhar-Dixit commented Apr 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

[mlir][affine] Modify assertion into a user visible diagnostic #136474

[mlir][affine] Modify assertion into a user visible diagnostic #136474

Uh oh!

Conversation

Prakhar-Dixit commented Apr 20, 2025

Uh oh!

llvmbot commented Apr 20, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

llvmbot commented Apr 20, 2025

Uh oh!

Prakhar-Dixit commented Apr 20, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Prakhar-Dixit commented Apr 24, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

llvmbot commented Apr 20, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Prakhar-Dixit commented Apr 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading