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

Is -munsafe-fp-atomics safe on AMD GPUs? #1248

Open
pgrete opened this issue Jan 25, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

Is -munsafe-fp-atomics safe on AMD GPUs? #1248

pgrete opened this issue Jan 25, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@pgrete
Copy link

pgrete commented Jan 25, 2024

How many device atomics are used in Ascent and it's software stack and is the internal programming/memory model safe with regard to this, see https://docs.olcf.ornl.gov/systems/frontier_user_guide.html#floating-point-fp-atomic-operations-and-coarse-fine-grained-memory-allocations ?

We've been using Kokkos::ScatterViews on AMD and without hardware atomics performance is >100x worse than with so I'm wondering if it's safe to globally turn on when compiling Ascent (and not just for our downstream code that links against Ascent).

@cyrush
Copy link
Member

cyrush commented Jan 31, 2024

@pgrete We are using atomics and I believe our allocations are coarse grained - which would be compatible with -munsafe-fp-atomics.

I looked at the allocs we use with RAJA + I asked the VTK-m team to check. Since VTK-m is are using Kokkos and default device allocations are coarse grained, I would expect them to be fine.

We haven't done any explicit performance testing with this flag (unless VTK-m or Kokkos is turning it on for us)

@pgrete
Copy link
Author

pgrete commented Feb 1, 2024

Great, thanks, I'll give this a try.
Feel free to close the issue once confirmed with the other libs.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants