Current status: Under development and not enabled by default
pybind11
must be installed and able to be located by CMake (auto-detected if installed via python -m pip install pybind11
). Note: minimum version required: :2.6.0.MLIR_BINDINGS_PYTHON_ENABLED
:BOOL
Enables building the Python bindings. Defaults to OFF
.
Python3_EXECUTABLE
:STRING
Specifies the python
executable used for the LLVM build, including for determining header/link flags for the Python bindings. On systems with multiple Python implementations, setting this explicitly to the preferred python3
executable is strongly recommended.
MLIR_PYTHON_BINDINGS_VERSION_LOCKED
:BOOL
Links the native extension against the Python runtime library, which is optional on some platforms. While setting this to OFF
can yield some greater deployment flexibility, linking in this way allows the linker to report compile time errors for unresolved symbols on all platforms, which makes for a smoother development workflow. Defaults to ON
.
It is recommended to use a python virtual environment. Many ways exist for this, but the following is the simplest:
# Make sure your 'python' is what you expect. Note that on multi-python # systems, this may have a version suffix, and on many Linuxes and MacOS where # python2 and python3 co-exist, you may also want to use `python3`. which python python -m venv ~/.venv/mlirdev source ~/.venv/mlirdev/bin/activate # Now the `python` command will resolve to your virtual environment and # packages will be installed there. python -m pip install pybind11 numpy # Now run `cmake`, `ninja`, et al.
For interactive use, it is sufficient to add the python
directory in your build/
directory to the PYTHONPATH
. Typically:
export PYTHONPATH=$(cd build && pwd)/python
There are likely two primary use cases for the MLIR python bindings:
Support users who expect that an installed version of LLVM/MLIR will yield the ability to import mlir
and use the API in a pure way out of the box.
Downstream integrations will likely want to include parts of the API in their private namespace or specially built libraries, probably mixing it with other python native bits.
In order to support use case #2, the Python bindings are organized into composable modules that downstream integrators can include and re-export into their own namespace if desired. This forces several design points:
Separate the construction/populating of a py::module
from PYBIND11_MODULE
global constructor.
Introduce headers for C++-only wrapper classes as other related C++ modules will need to interop with it.
Separate any initialization routines that depend on optional components into its own module/dependency (currently, things like registerAllDialects
fall into this category).
There are a lot of co-related issues of shared library linkage, distribution concerns, etc that affect such things. Organizing the code into composable modules (versus a monolithic cpp
file) allows the flexibility to address many of these as needed over time. Also, compilation time for all of the template meta-programming in pybind scales with the number of things you define in a translation unit. Breaking into multiple translation units can significantly aid compile times for APIs with a large surface area.
Generally, the C++ codebase namespaces most things into the mlir
namespace. However, in order to modularize and make the Python bindings easier to understand, sub-packages are defined that map roughly to the directory structure of functional units in MLIR.
Examples:
mlir.ir
mlir.passes
(pass
is a reserved word :( )mlir.dialect
mlir.execution_engine
(aside from namespacing, it is important that “bulky”/optional parts like this are isolated)In addition, initialization functions that imply optional dependencies should be in underscored (notionally private) modules such as _init
and linked separately. This allows downstream integrators to completely customize what is included “in the box” and covers things like dialect registration, pass registration, etc.
LLVM/MLIR is a non-trivial python-native project that is likely to co-exist with other non-trivial native extensions. As such, the native extension (i.e. the .so
/.pyd
/.dylib
) is exported as a notionally private top-level symbol (_mlir
), while a small set of Python code is provided in mlir/__init__.py
and siblings which loads and re-exports it. This split provides a place to stage code that needs to prepare the environment before the shared library is loaded into the Python runtime, and also provides a place that one-time initialization code can be invoked apart from module constructors.
To start with the mlir/__init__.py
loader shim can be very simple and scale to future need:
from _mlir import *
The Python APIs should seek to layer on top of the C-API to the degree possible. Especially for the core, dialect-independent parts, such a binding enables packaging decisions that would be difficult or impossible if spanning a C++ ABI boundary. In addition, factoring in this way side-steps some very difficult issues that arise when combining RTTI-based modules (which pybind derived things are) with non-RTTI polymorphic C++ code (the default compilation mode of LLVM).
There are several top-level types in the core IR that are strongly owned by their python-side reference:
PyContext
(mlir.ir.Context
)PyModule
(mlir.ir.Module
)PyOperation
(mlir.ir.Operation
) - but with caveatsAll other objects are dependent. All objects maintain a back-reference (keep-alive) to their closest containing top-level object. Further, dependent objects fall into two categories: a) uniqued (which live for the life-time of the context) and b) mutable. Mutable objects need additional machinery for keeping track of when the C++ instance that backs their Python object is no longer valid (typically due to some specific mutation of the IR, deletion, or bulk operation).
The following types support being bound to the current thread as a context manager:
PyLocation
(loc: mlir.ir.Location = None
)PyInsertionPoint
(ip: mlir.ir.InsertionPoint = None
)PyMlirContext
(context: mlir.ir.Context = None
)In order to support composability of function arguments, when these types appear as arguments, they should always be the last and appear in the above order and with the given names (which is generally the order in which they are expected to need to be expressed explicitly in special cases) as necessary. Each should carry a default value of py::none()
and use either a manual or automatic conversion for resolving either with the explicit value or a value from the thread context manager (i.e. DefaultingPyMlirContext
or DefaultingPyLocation
).
The rationale for this is that in Python, trailing keyword arguments to the right are the most composable, enabling a variety of strategies such as kwarg passthrough, default values, etc. Keeping function signatures composable increases the chances that interesting DSLs and higher level APIs can be constructed without a lot of exotic boilerplate.
Used consistently, this enables a style of IR construction that rarely needs to use explicit contexts, locations, or insertion points but is free to do so when extra control is needed.
As mentioned above, PyOperation
is special because it can exist in either a top-level or dependent state. The life-cycle is unidirectional: operations can be created detached (top-level) and once added to another operation, they are then dependent for the remainder of their lifetime. The situation is more complicated when considering construction scenarios where an operation is added to a transitive parent that is still detached, necessitating further accounting at such transition points (i.e. all such added children are initially added to the IR with a parent of their outer-most detached operation, but then once it is added to an attached operation, they need to be re-parented to the containing module).
Due to the validity and parenting accounting needs, PyOperation
is the owner for regions and blocks and needs to be a top-level type that we can count on not aliasing. This let's us do things like selectively invalidating instances when mutations occur without worrying that there is some alias to the same operation in the hierarchy. Operations are also the only entity that are allowed to be in a detached state, and they are interned at the context level so that there is never more than one Python mlir.ir.Operation
object for a unique MlirOperation
, regardless of how it is obtained.
The C/C++ API allows for Region/Block to also be detached, but it simplifies the ownership model a lot to eliminate that possibility in this API, allowing the Region/Block to be completely dependent on its owning operation for accounting. The aliasing of Python Region
/Block
instances to underlying MlirRegion
/MlirBlock
is considered benign and these objects are not interned in the context (unlike operations).
If we ever want to re-introduce detached regions/blocks, we could do so with new “DetachedRegion” class or similar and also avoid the complexity of accounting. With the way it is now, we can avoid having a global live list for regions and blocks. We may end up needing an op-local one at some point TBD, depending on how hard it is to guarantee how mutations interact with their Python peer objects. We can cross that bridge easily when we get there.
Module, when used purely from the Python API, can't alias anyway, so we can use it as a top-level ref type without a live-list for interning. If the API ever changes such that this cannot be guaranteed (i.e. by letting you marshal a native-defined Module in), then there would need to be a live table for it too.
In general, for the core parts of MLIR, the Python bindings should be largely isomorphic with the underlying C++ structures. However, concessions are made either for practicality or to give the resulting library an appropriately “Pythonic” flavor.
Generally favor converting trivial methods like getContext()
, getName()
, isEntryBlock()
, etc to read-only Python properties (i.e. context
). It is primarily a matter of calling def_property_readonly
vs def
in binding code, and makes things feel much nicer to the Python side.
For example, prefer:
m.def_property_readonly("context", ...)
Over:
m.def("getContext", ...)
Things that have nice printed representations are really great :) If there is a reasonable printed form, it can be a significant productivity boost to wire that to the __repr__
method (and verify it with a doctest).
Name functions/methods/properties in snake_case
and classes in CamelCase
. As a mechanical concession to Python style, this can go a long way to making the API feel like it fits in with its peers in the Python landscape.
If in doubt, choose names that will flow properly with other PEP 8 style names.
Many core IR constructs provide methods directly on the instance to query count and begin/end iterators. Prefer hoisting these to dedicated pseudo containers.
For example, a direct mapping of blocks within regions could be done this way:
region = ... for block in region: pass
However, this way is preferred:
region = ... for block in region.blocks: pass print(len(region.blocks)) print(region.blocks[0]) print(region.blocks[-1])
Instead of leaking STL-derived identifiers (front
, back
, etc), translate them to appropriate __dunder__
methods and iterator wrappers in the bindings.
Note that this can be taken too far, so use good judgment. For example, block arguments may appear container-like but have defined methods for lookup and mutation that would be hard to model properly without making semantics complicated. If running into these, just mirror the C/C++ API.
One stop helpers that aggregate over multiple low level entities can be incredibly helpful and are encouraged within reason. For example, making Context
have a parse_asm
or equivalent that avoids needing to explicitly construct a SourceMgr can be quite nice. One stop helpers do not have to be mutually exclusive with a more complete mapping of the backing constructs.
Tests should be added in the test/Bindings/Python
directory and should typically be .py
files that have a lit run line.
We use lit
and FileCheck
based tests:
FileCheck
.parse_asm
call.CHECK
ing as needed.# RUN: %PYTHON %s | mlir-opt -split-input-file | FileCheck # TODO: Move to a test utility class once any of this actually exists. def print_module(f): m = f() print("// -----") print("// TEST_FUNCTION:", f.__name__) print(m.to_asm()) return f # CHECK-LABEL: TEST_FUNCTION: create_my_op @print_module def create_my_op(): m = mlir.ir.Module() builder = m.new_op_builder() # CHECK: mydialect.my_operation ... builder.my_op() return m
The MLIR Python bindings integrate with the tablegen-based ODS system for providing user-friendly wrappers around MLIR dialects and operations. There are multiple parts to this integration, outlined below. Most details have been elided: refer to the build rules and python sources under mlir.dialects
for the canonical way to use this facility.
{DIALECT_NAMESPACE}.py
wrapper modulesEach dialect with a mapping to python requires that an appropriate {DIALECT_NAMESPACE}.py
wrapper module is created. This is done by invoking mlir-tblgen
on a python-bindings specific tablegen wrapper that includes the boilerplate and actual dialect specific td
file. An example, for the StandardOps
(which is assigned the namespace std
as a special case):
#ifndef PYTHON_BINDINGS_STANDARD_OPS #define PYTHON_BINDINGS_STANDARD_OPS include "mlir/Bindings/Python/Attributes.td" include "mlir/Dialect/StandardOps/IR/Ops.td" #endif
In the main repository, building the wrapper is done via the CMake function add_mlir_dialect_python_bindings
, which invokes:
mlir-tblgen -gen-python-op-bindings -bind-dialect={DIALECT_NAMESPACE} \ {PYTHON_BINDING_TD_FILE}
When the python bindings need to locate a wrapper module, they consult the dialect_search_path
and use it to find an appropriately named module. For the main repository, this search path is hard-coded to include the mlir.dialects
module, which is where wrappers are emitted by the abobe build rule. Out of tree dialects and add their modules to the search path by calling:
mlir._cext.append_dialect_search_prefix("myproject.mlir.dialects")
The wrapper module tablegen emitter outputs:
_Dialect
class (extending mlir.ir.Dialect
) with a DIALECT_NAMESPACE
attribute.{OpName}
class for each operation (extending mlir.ir.OpView
).Note: In order to avoid naming conflicts, all internal names used by the wrapper module are prefixed by _ods_
.
Each concrete OpView
subclass further defines several public-intended attributes:
OPERATION_NAME
attribute with the str
fully qualified operation name (i.e. std.absf
).__init__
method for the default builder if one is defined or inferred for the operation.@property
getter for each operand or result (using an auto-generated name for unnamed of each).@property
getter, setter and deleter for each declared attribute.It further emits additional private-intended attributes meant for subclassing and customization (default cases omit these attributes in favor of the defaults on OpView
):
_ODS_REGIONS
: A specification on the number and types of regions. Currently a tuple of (min_region_count, has_no_variadic_regions). Note that the API does some light validation on this but the primary purpose is to capture sufficient information to perform other default building and region accessor generation._ODS_OPERAND_SEGMENTS
and _ODS_RESULT_SEGMENTS
: Black-box value which indicates the structure of either the operand or results with respect to variadics. Used by OpView._ods_build_default
to decode operand and result lists that contain lists.Presently, only a single, default builder is mapped to the __init__
method. The intent is that this __init__
method represents the most specific of the builders typically generated for C++; however currently it is just the generic form below.
mlir.ir.Type
.List[mlir.ir.Type]
.mlir.ir.Value
.List[mlir.ir.Value]
.mlir.ir.Attribute
.loc
: An explicit mlir.ir.Location
to use. Defaults to the location bound to the thread (i.e. with Location.unknown():
) or an error if none is bound nor specified.ip
: An explicit mlir.ir.InsertionPoint
to use. Default to the insertion point bound to the thread (i.e. with InsertionPoint(...):
).In addition, each OpView
inherits a build_generic
method which allows construction via a (nested in the case of variadic) sequence of results
and operands
. This can be used to get some default construction semantics for operations that are otherwise unsupported in Python, at the expense of having a very generic signature.