donald chen

> > Thanks for iterating on this patch. Before I look into the details further, I would like to understand some background: Is this patch intended to fuse nest region...

> I understand this makes sense as something good to do always, but isnt this a one-off pattern that you want. Does it have to be a canonicalization where it...

> Thanks! Good to me for having as a canonicalization but under the caveat that if there is a valid case to move it out if canonicalization then we do...

> This looks like an interesting canonicalization, indeed! > > Two side effects we should watch out for: > > 1. This may lead to not only lit test failures...

> As noted in my above comment, if there is a consensus that this is a canonicalization, please include that justification in the pr description vs justifying as an optimization....

ping @MaheshRavishankar @stellaraccident :)

> > After receiving multiple concerns about placing this pattern in canonicalize, I have reconsidered the validity of this pattern in canonicalize > > can we elaborate on this? I...

I have updated the docs according the discuss above and https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-update-to-general-design-section-of-operation-canonicalizations-in-mlir/79355. Please help me review it too. @MaheshRavishankar @stellaraccident @dcaballe @stellaraccident @joker-eph

Thanks for the comments! Based on the comment's suggestion, the documentation part of this PR has been moved to https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99753

> The code LGTM. I would move the doc changes to a separate PR, as suggested. Nice catch! I have modify the code according to your comment and move the...