Adding new kernels to the framework

[jesuisalexjamet]

Good morning folks!

I am writing this to you as a question/suggestion. Currently working on graph-processing and going through recent literature on the topic, I figured out that most papers make use of either the Ligra framework or this one. It turns out, Ligra implements some kernels that are not available here (e.g.: Raddi, MIS).

However, this framework supporting a widely available graph file format, which I believe makes it a better fit for adoption and I do believe that we would all benefit from the addition of some extra kernels. So there comes the question: do plan including some more kernels?

[sbeamer]

We are currently not developing additional kernels for gapbs, but we welcome contributions! As outlined in CONTRIBUTING.md, we focus on the kernels included in the benchmark. However, as you mentioned, having more kernels in gapbs could be convenient for many things.

Rather than maximizing the number of kernels, we have strived to ensure our implementations are portable & high-performance. Gapbs continues to be competitive with the leading kernels IISWC20, and has had some great external contributions.

[jesuisalexjamet]

First of all, thank you for your answer. As I said in my message, as part of the project I am currently working on I would need to expend the set of workload I am benchmarking. If you are not planning to extend it then I believe I can give it a shot and propose them as pull requests to this repo and see what you think about it.

So I will close this issue and I will probably come to you later. Thanks! 😄

[sbeamer]

For graph workloads, it is surprisingly more important to consider a variety of input graphs than kernels. If you need to expand the benchmark, consider adding more graphs. IISWC15