Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[QST] Why we use three sync in sgemm_1? #1442

Open
ziyuhuang123 opened this issue Mar 29, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

[QST] Why we use three sync in sgemm_1? #1442

ziyuhuang123 opened this issue Mar 29, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@ziyuhuang123
Copy link

I am learning this example:

cp_async_fence(); // Label the end of (potential) cp.async instructions
cp_async_wait<0>(); // Sync on all (potential) cp.async instructions
__syncthreads(); // Wait for all threads to write to smem

What is your question?

    cp_async_fence();        // Label the end of (potential) cp.async instructions
    cp_async_wait<0>();      // Sync on all (potential) cp.async instructions
    __syncthreads();         // Wait for all threads to write to smem

Why we have three sync in sgemm_1???

@cloudhan
Copy link

cloudhan commented Apr 7, 2024

On some new architectures say sm_80, the very basic form copy(...), that is, without specifying the copy atom, might generate cp.async instruction. So you need further safety guarantee.

#1231

Copy link

github-actions bot commented May 9, 2024

This issue has been labeled inactive-30d due to no recent activity in the past 30 days. Please close this issue if no further response or action is needed. Otherwise, please respond with a comment indicating any updates or changes to the original issue and/or confirm this issue still needs to be addressed. This issue will be labeled inactive-90d if there is no activity in the next 60 days.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants