Transition GPUArrays to KernelAbstractions #451
Conversation
|
|
||
| abstract type AbstractGPUBackend end | ||
|
|
||
| abstract type AbstractKernelContext end |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is the intention to remove AbstractKernelContext completely?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah I think so. It shouldn't be needed anymore.
| error("Not implemented") # COV_EXCL_LINE | ||
| # TODO: | ||
| # - Rename KA device to backend | ||
| # - Who owns `AbstractGPUBackend`? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Right now, AbstractGPUBackend is only used in the JLArrays lib, but can't we work towards deprecating that lib with KA's CPU capabilities?
If so, why do we need AbstractGPUBackend? Can't we just use KA's Backend?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we need a JLArrays implementation using KA first.
| idx = linear_index(ctx) | ||
| idx > length(a) && return | ||
| @kernel rand!(a, randstate) | ||
| idx = @index(Global, Linear) | ||
| @inbounds a[idx] = gpu_rand(T, ctx, randstates) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this the only way people will be using gpu_rand()? Or will they be calling the functions on lines {33, 40, 58...}?
If so, we can just pass idx as threadid into the above functions, right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The only supported API are the Random stdlib functions; calling gpu_rand explicitly is not supported, so feel free to refactor.
Ideally, yes, it would be nice if we can remove all of the |
|
Great! I'm working on this for like an hour or two a day, so expect a PR next week? #517 is kinda in the right direction, but I have another branch that is rebased up to master so I can test ROC / CuArrays at least. |
|
Can this be closed? |
Depends on JuliaGPU/KernelAbstractions.jl#317
Can happen last as long as we decide where backend lives.