fix: better block/grid size determination #54
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Codecov ReportPatch coverage:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #54 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage 100.00% 100.00%
=========================================
Files 8 8
Lines 552 567 +15
Branches 86 88 +2
=========================================
+ Hits 552 567 +15
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
piyanatk
approved these changes
May 9, 2023
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks @steven-murray . Look fine to me. A more proficient eye (than mine) on the GPU code will probably not hurt.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This fixes the setting of block and grid sizes. The total block size has to be less or equal to the nthreads (usually 1024). This was failing when there were too many ants. I've now refactored it out to a function which does it properly (for the case where the first axis is fastest).
It may be useful to check out whether there's any preference in CUDA itself for which axis should be fastest.