What is the strategy for tensor->memref conversion? (bufferization)

[_sean_silva]

@bondhugula

All of this sounds good to me. But for the third bullet: which Dialect 's transforms are you moving them to? These passes already depend on or in future would depend on interfaces used by region holding ops, and the Std dialect won’t depend on such. Why can’t they stay in lib/Transforms ?

I’d like to move to a model where each dialect is “self-sufficient” w.r.t. bufferization. I was referring to e.g. ⚙ D88083 [mlir] Add file to implement bufferization for shape ops. which will be moved to Dialect/Shape/Transforms/Bufferize.cpp

@bondhugula

Reg. bullet 5: Could the type conversion be implemented on LoopLikeOpInterface instead of on scf.for ? Both affine.for and scf.for are equivalent in that regard - they also both support return values. This is although a general question I had about whether conversions and op rewrite patterns could be implemented on op interfaces - I think there are no examples of this.

Interesting idea. I’ll look into it.