Skip to content
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

BLAZE_DEVICE_AVAILABLE annotations for views #9

Open
JPenuchot opened this issue May 27, 2019 · 4 comments
Open

BLAZE_DEVICE_AVAILABLE annotations for views #9

JPenuchot opened this issue May 27, 2019 · 4 comments
Assignees
Labels
good first issue Good for newcomers

Comments

@JPenuchot
Copy link
Member

Referring to STEllAR-GROUP/blaze#1

@JPenuchot JPenuchot changed the title BLAZE_HOST_DEVICE annotations BLAZE_HOST_DEVICE annotations for views May 27, 2019
@JPenuchot JPenuchot added the good first issue Good for newcomers label May 27, 2019
@JPenuchot JPenuchot self-assigned this May 27, 2019
@hkaiser
Copy link
Member

hkaiser commented May 28, 2019

@JPenuchot should we add similar annotations to the types in https://github.com/STEllAR-GROUP/blaze_tensor?

@JPenuchot
Copy link
Member Author

@JPenuchot should we add similar annotations to the types in https://github.com/STEllAR-GROUP/blaze_tensor?

At some point it will be necessary, however I might rename the BLAZE_HOST_DEVICE macro to BLAZE_DEVICE_AVAILABLE or something like that to make its purpose more clear, I'll confirm that later

@JPenuchot
Copy link
Member Author

@JPenuchot JPenuchot changed the title BLAZE_HOST_DEVICE annotations for views BLAZE_DEVICE_AVAILABLE annotations for views May 28, 2019
@JPenuchot
Copy link
Member Author

@hkaiser The macro has been changed to BLAZE_DEVICE_CALLABLE, the macros can be added to iterators now.

Here's a list of what should be checked before adding the macro:

  • The iterator has to carry a pointer to the underlying data at the end, not a reference to the CUDA vector/matrix/tensor
  • load() and other SIMD-related members should obviously not be device-callable

As you told me we're not rushing for that, getting core functionality working properly is the priority right now

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
good first issue Good for newcomers
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants