Clean up and simplify gpuDecideCompression
#13202
Conversation
vuule
added
cuIO
…clean-up-decide-compression
…e/cudf into clean-up-decide-compression
| compressed_data_size += comp_res->bytes_written; | ||
| if (comp_res->status != compression_status::SUCCESS) { atomicAdd(&error_count, 1); } | ||
| } | ||
| __syncwarp(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we write this kernel in a block-size agnostic way? Unlike __syncthreads();, using __syncwarp(); assumes that block_size == warp_size == 32.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That depends on how we would scale the parallelism with multiple warps. If any warps worked on a single chunks element, then, yes, we would need to syn all threads in the block. But, with multiple warps, IMO this kernel should actually have each warp would work on a separate chunks element. In this case we don't need to synchronize different warps and __syncwarp is still the right option.
I understand that my change left this ambiguous as warp size is used interchangeably for block and warp size. I'll try to make this clearer.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Modified the kernel to work with any number of warps in a block. The size can be adjusted via constexpr decide_compression_warps_in_block. Used warp_size as well, so we should be magic number-free now :)
…clean-up-decide-compression
…clean-up-decide-compression
| auto const lane_id = threadIdx.x % cudf::detail::warp_size; | ||
| auto const warp_id = threadIdx.x / cudf::detail::warp_size; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Question for the reviewers: Are there maybe helper functions for this? Looks very generic.
| auto const lane_id = threadIdx.x % cudf::detail::warp_size; | ||
| auto const warp_id = threadIdx.x / cudf::detail::warp_size; |
Co-authored-by: Bradley Dice <bdice@bradleydice.com>
| __shared__ __align__(8) EncColumnChunk ck_g[decide_compression_warps_in_block]; | ||
| __shared__ __align__(4) unsigned int compression_error[decide_compression_warps_in_block]; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why do we align them manually? And why do we need to align them?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It allows more efficient access, at least in theory. I'm not the one who added the alignment, and I also haven't tested how this alignment impacts performance in practice.
…clean-up-decide-compression
|
/merge |
Description
Changed the block size to single warp, since only 32 threads are used in the kernel.
Simplify the kernel logic a bit and remove unnecessary atomic operations.
FWIW, the kernel is faster now; not important as it is a tiny part of E2E time.
Checklist