Add broadcast operation transformation passes

[atgeller]

No description provided.

[github-actions]

CI Summary (push) — ✅ passed

Run #32896175273 · ✅ 7 · ⏩ 7 · ❌ 0 · ⛔ 0

Top-level jobs (14)

Job	Result
binaries	⏩ skipped
build_and_test	✅ success
changes	✅ success
config_devdeps	✅ success
config_source_build	⏩ skipped
config_wheeldeps	✅ success
devdeps	✅ success
docker_image	⏩ skipped
gen_code_coverage	⏩ skipped
metadata	✅ success
python_metapackages	⏩ skipped
python_wheels	⏩ skipped
source_build	⏩ skipped
wheeldeps	✅ success

⏩ Skipped jobs (7) — intentionally skipped on PR builds; run on merge_group / workflow_dispatch

Job
binaries
config_source_build
docker_image
gen_code_coverage
python_metapackages
python_wheels
source_build

All sub-jobs (43) — every matrix leg, with links

Job	Status	Link
Build and test (amd64, gcc12, openmpi) / Dev environment (Debug)	✅ success	view
Build and test (amd64, gcc12, openmpi) / Dev environment (Python)	✅ success	view
Build and test (amd64, llvm, openmpi) / Dev environment (Debug)	✅ success	view
Build and test (amd64, llvm, openmpi) / Dev environment (Python)	✅ success	view
Build and test (arm64, llvm, openmpi) / Dev environment (Debug)	✅ success	view
Build and test (arm64, llvm, openmpi) / Dev environment (Python)	✅ success	view
CI Summary	❔ in_progress	view
Check for stable CUDA-Q changes	✅ success	view
Configure build (devdeps)	✅ success	view
Configure build (source_build)	⏩ skipped	view
Configure build (wheeldeps)	✅ success	view
Create CUDA Quantum installer	⏩ skipped	view
Create Docker images	⏩ skipped	view
Create Python metapackages	⏩ skipped	view
Create Python wheels	⏩ skipped	view
Gen code coverage	⏩ skipped	view
Load dependencies (amd64, gcc12) / Caching	✅ success	view
Load dependencies (amd64, gcc12) / Finalize	✅ success	view
Load dependencies (amd64, gcc12) / Metadata	✅ success	view
Load dependencies (amd64, llvm) / Caching	✅ success	view
Load dependencies (amd64, llvm) / Finalize	✅ success	view
Load dependencies (amd64, llvm) / Metadata	✅ success	view
Load dependencies (arm64, gcc12) / Caching	✅ success	view
Load dependencies (arm64, gcc12) / Finalize	✅ success	view
Load dependencies (arm64, gcc12) / Metadata	✅ success	view
Load dependencies (arm64, llvm) / Caching	✅ success	view
Load dependencies (arm64, llvm) / Finalize	✅ success	view
Load dependencies (arm64, llvm) / Metadata	✅ success	view
Load source build cache	⏩ skipped	view
Load wheel dependencies (amd64, 12.6) / Caching	✅ success	view
Load wheel dependencies (amd64, 12.6) / Finalize	✅ success	view
Load wheel dependencies (amd64, 12.6) / Metadata	✅ success	view
Load wheel dependencies (amd64, 13.0) / Caching	✅ success	view
Load wheel dependencies (amd64, 13.0) / Finalize	✅ success	view
Load wheel dependencies (amd64, 13.0) / Metadata	✅ success	view
Load wheel dependencies (arm64, 12.6) / Caching	✅ success	view
Load wheel dependencies (arm64, 12.6) / Finalize	✅ success	view
Load wheel dependencies (arm64, 12.6) / Metadata	✅ success	view
Load wheel dependencies (arm64, 13.0) / Caching	✅ success	view
Load wheel dependencies (arm64, 13.0) / Finalize	✅ success	view
Load wheel dependencies (arm64, 13.0) / Metadata	✅ success	view
Prepare cache clean-up	✅ success	view
Retrieve PR info	✅ success	view

✅ Required checks (6/6) — declared in .github/required-checks.yml for push

Required check	Status	Link
Build and test (amd64, llvm, openmpi) / Dev environment (Debug)	✅ success	view
Build and test (amd64, llvm, openmpi) / Dev environment (Python)	✅ success	view
Build and test (arm64, llvm, openmpi) / Dev environment (Debug)	✅ success	view
Build and test (arm64, llvm, openmpi) / Dev environment (Python)	✅ success	view
Build and test (amd64, gcc12, openmpi) / Dev environment (Debug)	✅ success	view
Build and test (amd64, gcc12, openmpi) / Dev environment (Python)	✅ success	view

[schweitzpgi]

Looks good. I'm wondering if some of the super terse CHECK sets are sufficient. Might want to fire the output through generate-test-checks.py and prune less aggressively.

[schweitzpgi]

Seems like any sort of Unwind*Op ought to trigger this. (Although an UnwindContinueOp would be odd indeed here.)

[atgeller]

Is it possible to see a non "Unwind" return here in the IR?

[atgeller]

Thanks for the review @schweitzpgi! I'll work on updating this next week.

[atgeller]

Also, note for myself, to add support for subveqs if possible.