Accéder au contenu.
Menu Sympa

starpu-devel - Re: [Starpu-devel] Performance issue of StarPU on Intel self-hosted KNL

Objet : Developers list for StarPU

Archives de la liste

Re: [Starpu-devel] Performance issue of StarPU on Intel self-hosted KNL


Chronologique Discussions 
  • From: Mawussi Zounon <mawussi.zounon@manchester.ac.uk>
  • To: Olivier Aumage <olivier.aumage@inria.fr>
  • Cc: "starpu-devel@lists.gforge.inria.fr" <starpu-devel@lists.gforge.inria.fr>, Jakub Sistek <jakub.sistek@manchester.ac.uk>, Negin Bagherpour <negin.bagherpour@manchester.ac.uk>
  • Subject: Re: [Starpu-devel] Performance issue of StarPU on Intel self-hosted KNL
  • Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 16:18:22 +0000
  • Authentication-results: mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; spf=None smtp.pra=mawussi.zounon@manchester.ac.uk; spf=Pass smtp.mailfrom=mawussi.zounon@manchester.ac.uk; spf=None smtp.helo=postmaster@clarity.mcc.ac.uk
  • Ironport-phdr: 9a23:Htpi7Rdc/gAXnrvpUhD6dp+vlGMj4u6mDksu8pMizoh2WeGdxc67YB7h7PlgxGXEQZ/co6odzbGJ4+a9ASQp2tWojjMrSNR0TRgLiMEbzUQLIfWuLgnFFsPsdDEwB89YVVVorDmROElRH9viNRWJ+iXhpRZbIBj0NBJ0K+LpAcaSyp3vj6Hhs6HUNiJMhSS8bKk6BQizpArc/p0RhYp8K6srjBLUp3JHdsxXw3lpLBSdhUCvyN23+ctG+jtNoOkgv/xHTKP9eexsSLVHES89MiYn49Dtsh/rSAKJ7XsRSXkbiFxBCE7Y70epDd/KriLmu78li2GhNsrsQOVxAGz64g==
  • List-archive: <http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/pipermail/starpu-devel/>
  • List-id: "Developers list. For discussion of new features, code changes, etc." <starpu-devel.lists.gforge.inria.fr>

Hi Oliver,

It can worth including the StarPU initialization in at least one routine, for
the sake of comparison,
just to evaluate the gain of the Samuel's improvement.

Best regards,
--Mawussi
________________________________________
From: Olivier Aumage [olivier.aumage@inria.fr]
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2017 5:13 PM
To: Mawussi Zounon
Cc: Samuel Thibault; Negin Bagherpour; starpu-devel@lists.gforge.inria.fr;
Jakub Sistek
Subject: Re: [Starpu-devel] Performance issue of StarPU on Intel self-hosted
KNL

> Le 25 sept. 2017 à 12:10, Mawussi Zounon <mawussi.zounon@manchester.ac.uk>
> a écrit :
>
> Thanks Samuel,
>
> I will perform a quick benchmark then be back to you.
>
Hi Mawussi,

Even with a single topology load from hwloc now, it is still not advised to
perform a starpu_init()/starpu_shutdown() on every PLASMA call. :-)

Best regards,
--
Olivier

> Best regards,
> --Mawussi
> ________________________________________
> From: Samuel Thibault [samuel.thibault@inria.fr]
> Sent: Monday, September 25, 2017 1:16 PM
> To: Olivier Aumage; Mawussi Zounon; Negin Bagherpour;
> starpu-devel@lists.gforge.inria.fr; Jakub Sistek
> Subject: Re: [Starpu-devel] Performance issue of StarPU on Intel
> self-hosted KNL
>
> Samuel Thibault, on ven. 22 sept. 2017 11:48:12 +0200, wrote:
>> Olivier Aumage, on ven. 22 sept. 2017 09:12:27 +0200, wrote:
>>> The main reason for the initialization cost on KNL is the large number of
>>> cores and the fact that those cores are individually much less powerful
>>> and advanced than Broadwell's cores. Initializing libhwloc on the KNL
>>> takes about 0.5 to 1 second.
>>
>> And we do it twice, once for the whole architecture, and a second
>> time in _starpu_build_tree to get only the structure of the
>> architecture. Perhaps that second call could be avoided, it's probably
>> less expensive to make build_tree cope with structure-useless hwloc
>> object, than asking hwloc discovery a second time.
>
> I have fixed this.
>
> Samuel





Archives gérées par MHonArc 2.6.19+.

Haut de le page