-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.4k
[mlir][nvvm] Introduce elect.sync
Op
#68323
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The instruction is only available on sm_90/PTX8.0. Does MLIR have any constraints based on which GPU model we're compiling for?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It is a good point and thanks for the review.
NVVM dialect doesn't know SM arch. You can think that NVVM is similar to PTX, you can compile it but you should make sure that you have the SM arch to run.
A high-level dialect knows the SM arch and it's responsible of generating the right NVVM Ops. For example, a transformation from
vector
dialect ->nvvm
should know the SM target.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you for the explanation. So it would be similar to using LLVM intrinsics that may or may not be available for a particular target.
Speaking of intrinsics, it may make sense to make
elect.sync
an LLVM intrinsic. We'll eventually need it there in any case.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Exactly, it is similar to using LLVM intrinsic. NVVM was designed to map 1to1 to LLVM intrinsic.
FWIW, generating PTX like I do here is relatively new in MLIR. We noticed that LLVM doesn't support all of the PTX (also predicates). Therefore, I've recently implemented the
BasicPtxBuilderOpInterface
that generatesinline assembly
with the given PTX. This is what I use here.Yes it does makes sense. We would like to generate LLVM intrinsic whenever it is possible.