MLIR Open Meeting: Tensor Compiler WG, 2025-04-29 (original) (raw)

This Tuesday, April 29, (note that weekday change) we will hold a Tensor Compiler Working Group meeting that is open to the public.

The call starts at 9am PDT, 4pm UTC, 6pm CEST.

Zoom Meeting Link

Meeting ID: 851 5109 0498
Passcode: 828404

This meeting replaces the Open Design Meeting that would have been held on Thursday, May 1 as per TIme slots for Open MLIR Meetings

cc: @jpienaar @banach-space @dcaballe @rengolin @kuhar @sjarus @matthias-springer @javedabsar @Groverkss @qed for agenda.

rengolin April 25, 2025, 9:43am 2

Can we add this to the LLVM calendar?

ftynse April 28, 2025, 7:23am 3

Done

Hi all,

Hereby the agenda thus far:

The above is copied & pasted from the Tensor Compiler design group’s meetings document: MLIR TCDG - Meetings - Google Docs

Looking forward to seeing you later today!

On tensor compiler, the question that occurred to me during the meeting,

@rengolin do you envision tensor compiler to be an actual compiler (as in “it is able to code generate X”) or as a compiler framework (if I may) which is in a sense MLIR itself? I guess this would ultimately define the charter.

p.s.: perhaps this is a bad place to discuss this but i figured it’s relevant enough to just start questioning here

rengolin April 29, 2025, 6:33pm 6

As a compiler framework. Enough to be able to write E2E tests to show-case the tensor compiler dialects, their lowering, the upstream transforms and how they combine together. This also works as a “documentation” on how to create your own downstream compiler, based on the same infrastructure, without having to reimplement the world.

Writing charter documents is akin to de-juri consensus by theoretical design. Having a framework is like a de-facto standard that encodes the relationships. The former leaves all the implementation details to the user, and we end up with N+1 compilers. The latter encourages all those projects to reuse the code, and to improve them, upstream.

If one day this becomes a proper upstream compiler or not is orthogonal and should be considered once we’re all happy with the infra and have enough bandwidth to do more. But it should not be the first step, or we’ll create unnecessary contention from the start and won’t get anywhere.

Here’s a copy of the notes for today’s meeting:

And, as is tradition, we didn’t get to Andrzej’s vector topics… :sweat_smile: