__CUDA_ARCH__ flag with Thrust execution policy - cuda

I have a __host__ __device__ function which is a wrapper that calls into "sort" function of the thrust library. Inside this wrapper, I am using the __CUDA_ARCH__ flag to set the execution policy to "thrust::device" when called from host and "thrust::seq" when called from device. The following piece of code generates a runtime error -
#ifndef __CUDA_ARCH__
thrust::stable_sort(thrust::device, data, data + num, customGreater<T>());
#else
thrust::stable_sort(thrust::seq, data, data + num, customGreater<T>());
#endif
The error is-
Unexpected Standard exception:
What() is:merge_sort: failed on 2nd step: invalid device function
As per my understanding, CUDA_ARCH can be used for conditional compilation. I request for help in understanding why this error is thrown.

It seems you are stepping on this issue. In a nutshell, thrust uses CUB functionality under the hood for certain algorithms (including sort). Your use of __CUDA_ARCH__ macro in your code, which wraps around thrust algorithm calls that use CUB, is interfering with CUB code that expects to be able to use this macro for all paths.
A possible workaround is to do "your own dispatch":
$ cat t142.cu
#include <iostream>
#include <thrust/sort.h>
#include <thrust/execution_policy.h>
template <typename T>
struct customGreater {
__host__ __device__ bool operator()(T &t1, T &t2){
return (t1 > t2);}
};
template <typename T>
__host__ __device__
void my_sort_wrapper(T *data, size_t num){
int hostdev = 0; // 0=device code
#ifndef __CUDA_ARCH__
hostdev = 1; // 1=host code
#endif
if (hostdev == 0) thrust::stable_sort(thrust::seq, data, data + num, customGreater<T>());
else thrust::stable_sort(thrust::device, data, data + num, customGreater<T>());
}
template <typename T>
__global__ void my_dev_sort(T *data, size_t num){
my_sort_wrapper(data, num);
}
typedef int mytype;
const size_t sz = 10;
int main(){
mytype *d_data;
cudaMalloc(&d_data, sz*sizeof(mytype));
cudaMemset(d_data, 0, sz*sizeof(mytype));
my_sort_wrapper(d_data, sz);
my_dev_sort<<<1,1>>>(d_data, sz);
cudaDeviceSynchronize();
}
$ nvcc t142.cu -o t142
$ cuda-memcheck ./t142
========= CUDA-MEMCHECK
========= ERROR SUMMARY: 0 errors
$
With this realization, the use of the __CUDA_ARCH__ macro does not perturb the compilation of the thrust algorithms.
Another possible workaround is simply to use thrust::device policy for both cases (no dispatch - just the thrust algorithm call). Except in the case of CUDA Dynamic Parallelism, thrust::device will "decay" to thrust::seq when used in device code.
I would expect that these suggestions would only be necessary/relevant when the thrust algorithm uses CUB functionality in the underlying implementation.
If you don't like this behavior, you could file a thrust issue.

Unfortunately, we can't fix this in Thrust. The trouble here is that the NVCC compiler needs to see all __global__ function template instantiations during host compilation (e.g. when __CUDA_ARCH__ is not defined), otherwise the kernels will be treated as unused and discarded. See this CUB GitHub issue for more details.
As Robert suggested, a workaround such as this should be fine:
#include <iostream>
#include <thrust/sort.h>
#include <thrust/execution_policy.h>
template <typename T>
struct customGreater {
__host__ __device__ bool operator()(T &t1, T &t2){
return (t1 > t2);}
};
#if defined(__CUDA_ARCH__)
#define DEVICE_COMPILATION 1
#else
#define DEVICE_COMPILATION 0
#endif
template <typename T>
__host__ __device__
void my_sort(T *data, size_t num){
if (DEVICE_COMPILATION)
thrust::stable_sort(thrust::device, data, data + num, customGreater<T>());
else
thrust::stable_sort(thrust::seq, data, data + num, customGreater<T>());
}
template <typename T>
__global__ void my_dev_sort(T *data, size_t num){
my_sort(data, num);
}
typedef int mytype;
const size_t sz = 10;
int main(){
mytype *d_data;
cudaMallocManaged(&d_data, sz*sizeof(mytype));
cudaMemset(d_data, 0, sz*sizeof(mytype));
my_sort(d_data, sz);
my_dev_sort<<<1,1>>>(d_data, sz);
cudaFree(d_data);
cudaDeviceSynchronize();
}

Related

Thrust error with CUDA separate compilation

I'm running into an error when I try to compile CUDA with relocatable device code enabled (-rdc = true). I'm using Visual Studio 2013 as compiler with CUDA 7.5. Below is a small example that shows the error. To clarify, the code below runs fine when -rdc = false, but when set to true, the error shows up.
The error simply says: CUDA error 11 [\cuda\detail\cub\device\dispatch/device_radix_sort_dispatch.cuh, 687]: invalid argument
Then I found this, which says:
When invoked with primitive data types, thrust::sort, thrust::sort_by_key,thrust::stable_sort, thrust::stable_sort_by_key may fail to link in some cases with nvcc -rdc=true.
Is there some workaround to allow separate compilation?
main.cpp:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <vector>
#include "cuda_runtime.h"
#include "RadixSort.h"
typedef unsigned int uint;
typedef unsigned __int64 uint64;
int main()
{
RadixSort sorter;
uint n = 10;
std::vector<uint64> test(n);
for (uint i = 0; i < n; i++)
test[i] = i + 1;
uint64 * d_array;
uint64 size = n * sizeof(uint64);
cudaMalloc(&d_array, size);
cudaMemcpy(d_array, test.data(), size, cudaMemcpyHostToDevice);
try
{
sorter.Sort(d_array, n);
}
catch (const std::exception & ex)
{
printf("%s\n", ex.what());
}
}
RadixSort.h:
#pragma once
typedef unsigned int uint;
typedef unsigned __int64 uint64;
class RadixSort
{
public:
RadixSort() {}
~RadixSort() {}
void Sort(uint64 * input, const uint n);
};
RadixSort.cu:
#include "RadixSort.h"
#include <thrust/device_vector.h>
#include <thrust/device_ptr.h>
#include <thrust/sort.h>
void RadixSort::Sort(uint64 * input, const uint n)
{
thrust::device_ptr<uint64> d_input = thrust::device_pointer_cast(input);
thrust::stable_sort(d_input, d_input + n);
cudaDeviceSynchronize();
}
As mentioned in the comments by Robert Crovella:
Changing the CUDA architecture to a higher value will solve this problem. In my case I changed it to compute_30 and sm_30 under CUDA C++ -> Device -> Code Generation.
Edit:
The general recommendation is to select the best fit hierarchy for your specific GPU. See the link in comments for additional information.

CUDA: How to add a device function from host to an array declared in Device? [duplicate]

I would like to create a list of function pointers dynamically on the CPU (with some sort of push_back() method called from main()) and copy it to a GPU __constant__ or __device__ array, without needing to resort to static __device__ function pointers. I believe this question is related to my problem; however, my goal is to create the __host__ function pointer array iteratively and then copy it to the __constant__ function pointer array instead of initialising the latter on declaration.
A working code example with static function pointers (as seen here or here) would be:
common.h:
#ifndef COMMON_H
#define COMMON_H
#include <stdio.h>
#include <iostream>
#define num_functions 3
#define gpuErrchk(ans) { gpuAssert((ans), __FILE__, __LINE__); }
inline void gpuAssert(cudaError_t code, const char *file, int line, bool abort=true)
{
if (code != cudaSuccess)
{
fprintf(stderr,"GPUassert: %s %s %d\n", cudaGetErrorString(code), file, line);
if (abort) exit(code);
}
}
// fptr_t: Pointer to void function that takes two integer lvalues
typedef void (*fptr_t)(int&, int&);
// some examples of void(int&, int&) functions...
__device__ void Add(int &a, int &b) {printf("Add... %i + %i = %i\n", a, b, a+b);}
__device__ void Subtract(int &a, int &b) {printf("Subtract... %i - %i = %i\n", a, b, a-b);}
__device__ void Multiply(int &a, int &b) {printf("Multiply... %i * %i = %i\n", a, b, a*b);}
// List of function pointers in device memory
__constant__ fptr_t constant_fList[num_functions];
// Kernel called from main(): choose the function to apply whose index is equal to thread ID
__global__ void kernel(int a, int b) {
fptr_t f;
if (threadIdx.x < num_functions) {
f = constant_fList[threadIdx.x];
f(a,b);
}
}
#endif
main.cu:
#include "common.h"
// Static device function pointers
__device__ fptr_t p_Add = Add;
__device__ fptr_t p_Sub = Subtract;
__device__ fptr_t p_Mul = Multiply;
// Load function list to constant memory
void loadList_staticpointers() {
fptr_t h_fList[num_functions];
gpuErrchk( cudaMemcpyFromSymbol(&h_fList[0], p_Add, sizeof(fptr_t)) );
gpuErrchk( cudaMemcpyFromSymbol(&h_fList[1], p_Sub, sizeof(fptr_t)) );
gpuErrchk( cudaMemcpyFromSymbol(&h_fList[2], p_Mul, sizeof(fptr_t)) );
gpuErrchk( cudaMemcpyToSymbol(constant_fList, h_fList, num_functions * sizeof(fptr_t)) );
}
int main() {
loadList_staticpointers();
int a = 12, b = 15;
kernel<<<1,3>>>(a, b);
gpuErrchk(cudaGetLastError());
gpuErrchk(cudaDeviceSynchronize());
return 0;
}
Specs: GeForce GTX 670, compiled for -arch=sm_30, CUDA 6.5, Ubuntu 14.04
I wish to avoid the use of static device function pointers, as appending each function would require code maintenance on the user side - declaration of a new static pointer like p_Add or p_Mul, manipulation of void loadList_functionpointers(), etc. To make it clear, I am trying something like the following (crashing) code:
main_wrong.cu:
#include "common.h"
#include <vector>
// Global variable: list of function pointers in host memory
std::vector<fptr_t> vec_fList;
// Add function to functions list
void addFunc(fptr_t f) {vec_fList.push_back(f);}
// Upload the functions in the std::vector<fptr_t> to GPU memory
// Copies CPU-side pointers to constant_fList, therefore crashes on kernel call
void UploadVector() {
fptr_t* h_vpointer = vec_fList.data();
gpuErrchk( cudaMemcpyToSymbol(constant_fList, h_vpointer, vec_fList.size() * sizeof(fptr_t)) );
}
int main() {
addFunc(Add);
addFunc(Subtract);
addFunc(Multiply);
int a = 12, b = 15;
UploadVector();
kernel<<<1,3>>>(a, b); // Wrong to call a host-side function pointer from a kernel
gpuErrchk(cudaGetLastError());
gpuErrchk(cudaDeviceSynchronize());
return 0;
}
My understanding is that function pointers pointing to host addresses are copied to the GPU and are unusable by the kernel, which needs pointers pointing to GPU addresses when the function f(a,b) is called. Populating a host-side array with device-side pointers would work for me with raw data (see this question) but not with function pointers. Trivial attempts with Unified Memory have failed as well... so far, I have only found static device-side pointers to work. Is there no other way to copy a dynamically created CPU array of function pointers onto the GPU?
If you can use C++11 (supported since CUDA 7), you could use the following to auto-generate the function table:
template <fptr_t... Functions>
__global__ void kernel(int a, int b)
{
constexpr auto num_f = sizeof...(Functions);
constexpr fptr_t table[] = { Functions... };
if (threadIdx.x < num_f)
{
fptr_t f = table[threadIdx.x];
f(a,b);
}
}
You would then call this kernel using
kernel<Add, Subtract, Multiply><<<1,3>>>(a, b);
Inspired by m.s.'s answer, I chose to pass the function pointer as a template parameter -this was in fact the key to solve my problem- and discovered that filling a __device__ array of function pointers dev_fList from the main() function iteratively without the help of static function pointers is indeed possible, plus C++11 compatibility is not even needed!
Here is a working example on a __device__ array in global memory. I have not tried its constant memory counterpart yet, but once a global memory array has been satisfactorily created, my guess is that a cudaMemcpyToSymbol(..., cudaMemcpyDeviceToDevice) should do the trick.
A kernel kernel() creates a GPU address for function pointer dev_f and copies the function f that was passed as a template argument. Since this is an iterative process from the CPU, only one thread (thread 0) is involved in this kernel, which is launched with configuration <<<1,1>>>. The static variable count_f takes care of indexing in dev_fList.
common.h:
#ifndef COMMON_H
#define COMMON_H
#include <stdio.h>
#include <iostream>
#define num_functions 3
#define gpuErrchk(ans) { gpuAssert((ans), __FILE__, __LINE__); }
inline void gpuAssert(cudaError_t code, const char *file, int line, bool abort=true)
{
if (code != cudaSuccess)
{
fprintf(stderr,"GPUassert: %s %s %d\n", cudaGetErrorString(code), file, line);
if (abort) exit(code);
}
}
// fptr_t: Pointer to void function that takes two integer lvalues
typedef void (*fptr_t)(int&, int&);
// some examples of void(int&, int&) functions...
__device__ void Add(int &a, int &b) {printf("Add... %i + %i = %i\n", a, b, a+b);}
__device__ void Subtract(int &a, int &b) {printf("Subtract... %i - %i = %i\n", a, b, a-b);}
__device__ void Multiply(int &a, int &b) {printf("Multiply... %i * %i = %i\n", a, b, a*b);}
// List of function pointers in device memory
// Note that, in my example, it resides in global memory space, not constant memory
__device__ fptr_t dev_fList[num_functions];
#endif
main.cu:
#include "common.h"
// Index in dev_fList[] == number of times addFunc<>() was launched
static int count_f = 0;
// Kernel that copies function f to the GPU
template<fptr_t f>
__global__ void kernel(int a, int b, int idx) {
fptr_t dev_f = f; // Create device function pointer
dev_fList[idx] = dev_f; // Populate the GPU array of function pointers
dev_fList[idx](a,b); // Make sure that the array was populated correctly
}
// Add function to functions list
template<fptr_t f>
void addFunc(const int &a, const int &b) {
if (count_f >= num_functions) {
std::cout << "Error: not enough memory statically allocated on device!\n";
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
kernel<f><<<1,1>>>(a,b,count_f);
gpuErrchk(cudaGetLastError());
gpuErrchk(cudaDeviceSynchronize());
count_f++;
}
int main() {
int a = 12, b = 15;
addFunc<Add>(a,b);
addFunc<Subtract>(a,b);
addFunc<Multiply>(a,b);
return 0;
}
Edit: Added copy of the array of function pointers to constant memory
For what it's worth, here is how to copy our dev_fList array to constant memory:
In common.h:
__constant__ fptr_t cst_fList[num_functions];
__global__ void cst_test(int a, int b, int idx) {
if (threadIdx.x < idx) cst_fList[threadIdx.x](a,b);
}
In main.cu main() function, after all desired functions have been added:
fptr_t *temp;
gpuErrchk( cudaMemcpyFromSymbol((void**)&temp, dev_fList[0], count_f * sizeof(fptr_t)) );
gpuErrchk( cudaMemcpyToSymbol(cst_fList[0], &temp, count_f * sizeof(fptr_t)) );
cst_test<<<1,count_f>>>(a,b, count_f);
gpuErrchk(cudaGetLastError());
gpuErrchk(cudaDeviceSynchronize());
It may look ugly as I understand that memory is transferred to the host via temp and then back to the device; more elegant suggestions are welcome.
It is impossible to use dynamically created CUDA device function pointers (at least not without crash or UB). The template based solutions work at compile time (not dynamic). The CUDA device function pointer approaches you see everywhere need device symbols in global space. This means that for every function a device function pointer must be already declared. This also means you cannot use normal C function pointers as reference, which are e.g. set at runtime. In comprehension, using CUDA device function pointers is questionable. Template based approaches look user-friendly, but are per definition not dynamic.
Example showing structure with function pointers:
This example shows a structure having some function pointers. In normal C++ code, you can set and change the device function pointers while the program is running (dynamically). With CUDA this example below is impossible, because the function pointers in the struct are no valid device symbols. This means they cannot be used with "cudaMemcpyFromSymbol". To circumvent this, either the original function (target of the function pointers) or global cuda device function pointers must be created. Both is not dynamic.
This is dynamic assignment:
typedef float (*pDistanceFu) (float, float);
typedef float (*pDecayFu) (float, float, float);
// In C++ you can set and reset the function pointer during run time whenever you want ..
struct DistFunction {
/*__host__ __device__*/ pDistanceFu distance; // uncomment for NVCC ..
/*__host__ __device__*/ pDecayFu rad_decay;
/*__host__ __device__*/ pDecayFu lrate_decay;
};
// you can do what you want ..
DistFunction foo, bar;
foo.distance = bar.distance;
// ..
This is how it should be with CUDA, but it will fail, because there is no valid device symbol :(
pDistanceFu hDistance;
pDecayFu hRadDay;
pDecayFu hLRateDecay;
void DeviceAssign(DistFunction &dist) {
cudaMemcpyFromSymbol(&hDistance, dist.distance, sizeof(pDistanceFu) );
cudaMemcpyFromSymbol(&hRadDay, dist.rad_decay, sizeof(pDecayFu) );
cudaMemcpyFromSymbol(&hLRateDecay, dist.lrate_decay, sizeof(pDecayFu) );
dist.distance = hDistance;
dist.rad_decay = hRadDay;
dist.lrate_decay = hLRateDecay;
}
Here is the classical way, but you notice, it is not dynamic anymore because the device symbol must refer to the function reference not a pointer which may chnage during run-time..
// .. and this would work
#ifdef __CUDACC__
__host__ __device__
#endif
inline float fcn_rad_decay (float sigma0, float T, float lambda) {
return std::floor(sigma0*exp(-T/lambda) + 0.5f);
}
__device__ pDistanceFu pFoo= fcn_rad_decay; // pointer must target a reference, no host pointer possible
void DeviceAssign2(DistFunction &dist) {
cudaMemcpyFromSymbol(&hLRateDecay, &fcn_rad_decay, sizeof(pDecayFu) );
// the same:
// cudaMemcpyFromSymbol(&hLRateDecay, pFoo, sizeof(pDecayFu) );
// ..
dist.lrate_decay = hLRateDecay;
// ..
}

CUDA: Copy dynamically created array of function pointers on the CPU to GPU memory

I would like to create a list of function pointers dynamically on the CPU (with some sort of push_back() method called from main()) and copy it to a GPU __constant__ or __device__ array, without needing to resort to static __device__ function pointers. I believe this question is related to my problem; however, my goal is to create the __host__ function pointer array iteratively and then copy it to the __constant__ function pointer array instead of initialising the latter on declaration.
A working code example with static function pointers (as seen here or here) would be:
common.h:
#ifndef COMMON_H
#define COMMON_H
#include <stdio.h>
#include <iostream>
#define num_functions 3
#define gpuErrchk(ans) { gpuAssert((ans), __FILE__, __LINE__); }
inline void gpuAssert(cudaError_t code, const char *file, int line, bool abort=true)
{
if (code != cudaSuccess)
{
fprintf(stderr,"GPUassert: %s %s %d\n", cudaGetErrorString(code), file, line);
if (abort) exit(code);
}
}
// fptr_t: Pointer to void function that takes two integer lvalues
typedef void (*fptr_t)(int&, int&);
// some examples of void(int&, int&) functions...
__device__ void Add(int &a, int &b) {printf("Add... %i + %i = %i\n", a, b, a+b);}
__device__ void Subtract(int &a, int &b) {printf("Subtract... %i - %i = %i\n", a, b, a-b);}
__device__ void Multiply(int &a, int &b) {printf("Multiply... %i * %i = %i\n", a, b, a*b);}
// List of function pointers in device memory
__constant__ fptr_t constant_fList[num_functions];
// Kernel called from main(): choose the function to apply whose index is equal to thread ID
__global__ void kernel(int a, int b) {
fptr_t f;
if (threadIdx.x < num_functions) {
f = constant_fList[threadIdx.x];
f(a,b);
}
}
#endif
main.cu:
#include "common.h"
// Static device function pointers
__device__ fptr_t p_Add = Add;
__device__ fptr_t p_Sub = Subtract;
__device__ fptr_t p_Mul = Multiply;
// Load function list to constant memory
void loadList_staticpointers() {
fptr_t h_fList[num_functions];
gpuErrchk( cudaMemcpyFromSymbol(&h_fList[0], p_Add, sizeof(fptr_t)) );
gpuErrchk( cudaMemcpyFromSymbol(&h_fList[1], p_Sub, sizeof(fptr_t)) );
gpuErrchk( cudaMemcpyFromSymbol(&h_fList[2], p_Mul, sizeof(fptr_t)) );
gpuErrchk( cudaMemcpyToSymbol(constant_fList, h_fList, num_functions * sizeof(fptr_t)) );
}
int main() {
loadList_staticpointers();
int a = 12, b = 15;
kernel<<<1,3>>>(a, b);
gpuErrchk(cudaGetLastError());
gpuErrchk(cudaDeviceSynchronize());
return 0;
}
Specs: GeForce GTX 670, compiled for -arch=sm_30, CUDA 6.5, Ubuntu 14.04
I wish to avoid the use of static device function pointers, as appending each function would require code maintenance on the user side - declaration of a new static pointer like p_Add or p_Mul, manipulation of void loadList_functionpointers(), etc. To make it clear, I am trying something like the following (crashing) code:
main_wrong.cu:
#include "common.h"
#include <vector>
// Global variable: list of function pointers in host memory
std::vector<fptr_t> vec_fList;
// Add function to functions list
void addFunc(fptr_t f) {vec_fList.push_back(f);}
// Upload the functions in the std::vector<fptr_t> to GPU memory
// Copies CPU-side pointers to constant_fList, therefore crashes on kernel call
void UploadVector() {
fptr_t* h_vpointer = vec_fList.data();
gpuErrchk( cudaMemcpyToSymbol(constant_fList, h_vpointer, vec_fList.size() * sizeof(fptr_t)) );
}
int main() {
addFunc(Add);
addFunc(Subtract);
addFunc(Multiply);
int a = 12, b = 15;
UploadVector();
kernel<<<1,3>>>(a, b); // Wrong to call a host-side function pointer from a kernel
gpuErrchk(cudaGetLastError());
gpuErrchk(cudaDeviceSynchronize());
return 0;
}
My understanding is that function pointers pointing to host addresses are copied to the GPU and are unusable by the kernel, which needs pointers pointing to GPU addresses when the function f(a,b) is called. Populating a host-side array with device-side pointers would work for me with raw data (see this question) but not with function pointers. Trivial attempts with Unified Memory have failed as well... so far, I have only found static device-side pointers to work. Is there no other way to copy a dynamically created CPU array of function pointers onto the GPU?
If you can use C++11 (supported since CUDA 7), you could use the following to auto-generate the function table:
template <fptr_t... Functions>
__global__ void kernel(int a, int b)
{
constexpr auto num_f = sizeof...(Functions);
constexpr fptr_t table[] = { Functions... };
if (threadIdx.x < num_f)
{
fptr_t f = table[threadIdx.x];
f(a,b);
}
}
You would then call this kernel using
kernel<Add, Subtract, Multiply><<<1,3>>>(a, b);
Inspired by m.s.'s answer, I chose to pass the function pointer as a template parameter -this was in fact the key to solve my problem- and discovered that filling a __device__ array of function pointers dev_fList from the main() function iteratively without the help of static function pointers is indeed possible, plus C++11 compatibility is not even needed!
Here is a working example on a __device__ array in global memory. I have not tried its constant memory counterpart yet, but once a global memory array has been satisfactorily created, my guess is that a cudaMemcpyToSymbol(..., cudaMemcpyDeviceToDevice) should do the trick.
A kernel kernel() creates a GPU address for function pointer dev_f and copies the function f that was passed as a template argument. Since this is an iterative process from the CPU, only one thread (thread 0) is involved in this kernel, which is launched with configuration <<<1,1>>>. The static variable count_f takes care of indexing in dev_fList.
common.h:
#ifndef COMMON_H
#define COMMON_H
#include <stdio.h>
#include <iostream>
#define num_functions 3
#define gpuErrchk(ans) { gpuAssert((ans), __FILE__, __LINE__); }
inline void gpuAssert(cudaError_t code, const char *file, int line, bool abort=true)
{
if (code != cudaSuccess)
{
fprintf(stderr,"GPUassert: %s %s %d\n", cudaGetErrorString(code), file, line);
if (abort) exit(code);
}
}
// fptr_t: Pointer to void function that takes two integer lvalues
typedef void (*fptr_t)(int&, int&);
// some examples of void(int&, int&) functions...
__device__ void Add(int &a, int &b) {printf("Add... %i + %i = %i\n", a, b, a+b);}
__device__ void Subtract(int &a, int &b) {printf("Subtract... %i - %i = %i\n", a, b, a-b);}
__device__ void Multiply(int &a, int &b) {printf("Multiply... %i * %i = %i\n", a, b, a*b);}
// List of function pointers in device memory
// Note that, in my example, it resides in global memory space, not constant memory
__device__ fptr_t dev_fList[num_functions];
#endif
main.cu:
#include "common.h"
// Index in dev_fList[] == number of times addFunc<>() was launched
static int count_f = 0;
// Kernel that copies function f to the GPU
template<fptr_t f>
__global__ void kernel(int a, int b, int idx) {
fptr_t dev_f = f; // Create device function pointer
dev_fList[idx] = dev_f; // Populate the GPU array of function pointers
dev_fList[idx](a,b); // Make sure that the array was populated correctly
}
// Add function to functions list
template<fptr_t f>
void addFunc(const int &a, const int &b) {
if (count_f >= num_functions) {
std::cout << "Error: not enough memory statically allocated on device!\n";
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
kernel<f><<<1,1>>>(a,b,count_f);
gpuErrchk(cudaGetLastError());
gpuErrchk(cudaDeviceSynchronize());
count_f++;
}
int main() {
int a = 12, b = 15;
addFunc<Add>(a,b);
addFunc<Subtract>(a,b);
addFunc<Multiply>(a,b);
return 0;
}
Edit: Added copy of the array of function pointers to constant memory
For what it's worth, here is how to copy our dev_fList array to constant memory:
In common.h:
__constant__ fptr_t cst_fList[num_functions];
__global__ void cst_test(int a, int b, int idx) {
if (threadIdx.x < idx) cst_fList[threadIdx.x](a,b);
}
In main.cu main() function, after all desired functions have been added:
fptr_t *temp;
gpuErrchk( cudaMemcpyFromSymbol((void**)&temp, dev_fList[0], count_f * sizeof(fptr_t)) );
gpuErrchk( cudaMemcpyToSymbol(cst_fList[0], &temp, count_f * sizeof(fptr_t)) );
cst_test<<<1,count_f>>>(a,b, count_f);
gpuErrchk(cudaGetLastError());
gpuErrchk(cudaDeviceSynchronize());
It may look ugly as I understand that memory is transferred to the host via temp and then back to the device; more elegant suggestions are welcome.
It is impossible to use dynamically created CUDA device function pointers (at least not without crash or UB). The template based solutions work at compile time (not dynamic). The CUDA device function pointer approaches you see everywhere need device symbols in global space. This means that for every function a device function pointer must be already declared. This also means you cannot use normal C function pointers as reference, which are e.g. set at runtime. In comprehension, using CUDA device function pointers is questionable. Template based approaches look user-friendly, but are per definition not dynamic.
Example showing structure with function pointers:
This example shows a structure having some function pointers. In normal C++ code, you can set and change the device function pointers while the program is running (dynamically). With CUDA this example below is impossible, because the function pointers in the struct are no valid device symbols. This means they cannot be used with "cudaMemcpyFromSymbol". To circumvent this, either the original function (target of the function pointers) or global cuda device function pointers must be created. Both is not dynamic.
This is dynamic assignment:
typedef float (*pDistanceFu) (float, float);
typedef float (*pDecayFu) (float, float, float);
// In C++ you can set and reset the function pointer during run time whenever you want ..
struct DistFunction {
/*__host__ __device__*/ pDistanceFu distance; // uncomment for NVCC ..
/*__host__ __device__*/ pDecayFu rad_decay;
/*__host__ __device__*/ pDecayFu lrate_decay;
};
// you can do what you want ..
DistFunction foo, bar;
foo.distance = bar.distance;
// ..
This is how it should be with CUDA, but it will fail, because there is no valid device symbol :(
pDistanceFu hDistance;
pDecayFu hRadDay;
pDecayFu hLRateDecay;
void DeviceAssign(DistFunction &dist) {
cudaMemcpyFromSymbol(&hDistance, dist.distance, sizeof(pDistanceFu) );
cudaMemcpyFromSymbol(&hRadDay, dist.rad_decay, sizeof(pDecayFu) );
cudaMemcpyFromSymbol(&hLRateDecay, dist.lrate_decay, sizeof(pDecayFu) );
dist.distance = hDistance;
dist.rad_decay = hRadDay;
dist.lrate_decay = hLRateDecay;
}
Here is the classical way, but you notice, it is not dynamic anymore because the device symbol must refer to the function reference not a pointer which may chnage during run-time..
// .. and this would work
#ifdef __CUDACC__
__host__ __device__
#endif
inline float fcn_rad_decay (float sigma0, float T, float lambda) {
return std::floor(sigma0*exp(-T/lambda) + 0.5f);
}
__device__ pDistanceFu pFoo= fcn_rad_decay; // pointer must target a reference, no host pointer possible
void DeviceAssign2(DistFunction &dist) {
cudaMemcpyFromSymbol(&hLRateDecay, &fcn_rad_decay, sizeof(pDecayFu) );
// the same:
// cudaMemcpyFromSymbol(&hLRateDecay, pFoo, sizeof(pDecayFu) );
// ..
dist.lrate_decay = hLRateDecay;
// ..
}

CUDA shared object between threads

I am totally new to CUDA. I want to create one object on the device, and access its member from different threads. I use nvcc -arch=sm_20 (on Tesla M2090), and if I run my code I get an 'unspecified launch failure'. Here is my code:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string>
using namespace std;
#ifdef __CUDACC__
#define CUDA_CALLABLE __host__ __device__
#else
#define CUDA_CALLABLE
#endif
class SimpleClass {
public:
int i;
CUDA_CALLABLE SimpleClass(){i=1;};
CUDA_CALLABLE ~SimpleClass(){};
};
__global__ void initkernel(SimpleClass *a){
a = new SimpleClass();
}
__global__ void delkernel(SimpleClass *a){
delete a;
}
__global__ void kernel(SimpleClass *a){
printf("%d\n", a->i);
}
int main() {
SimpleClass *a;
initkernel<<<1,1>>>(a);
cudaThreadSynchronize();
kernel<<<1,10>>>(a);
cudaThreadSynchronize();
delkernel<<<1,1>>>(a);
cudaThreadSynchronize();
cudaError_t error = cudaGetLastError();
string lastError = cudaGetErrorString(error);
printf("%s\n",lastError.c_str());
return 0;
}
You get the 'unspecified launch failure' during your first kernel code because 'a' is a pointer stored in the host, but you want to give it a value from a device function. If you want to allocate the object on the device, than you first have to allocate a pointer on the device and than you can read and write it form device (kernel) code, but be careful because it will require double indirection.
Your code should looks like something like this (the rest of the functions should be modified similarly):
__global__ void initkernel(SimpleClass** a){
*a = new SimpleClass();
}
int main() {
SimpleClass** a;
cudaMalloc((void**)&a, sizeof(SimpleClass**));
initkernel<<<1,1>>>(a);
cudaThreadSynchronize();
}
PS.: pQB is absolutely right about that, you should do an error check after each kernel code to detect the errors as soon as possible (and currently for finding the exact location of the error in your code)

How to advance iterator in thrust function

I'm doing some study on thrust. But I didn't understand how to get the value of an iterator point to.
An example code is like:
#include <thrust/for_each.h>
#include <thrust/device_vector.h>
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
using namespace std;
class ADD
{
private:
typedef typename thrust::device_vector<int>::iterator PTR;
public:
ADD(){}
~ADD(){}
void setPtr(PTR &ptr)
{this->ptr=ptr;}
__host__ __device__
void operator()(int &x)
{
// note that using printf in a __device__ function requires
// code compiled for a GPU with compute capability 2.0 or
// higher (nvcc --arch=sm_20)
x+=add();
}
__host__ __device__
int add()
{return *ptr++;}
private:
PTR ptr;
};
int main()
{
thrust::device_vector<int> d_vec(3);
d_vec[0] = 0; d_vec[1] = 1; d_vec[2] = 2;
thrust::device_vector<int>::iterator itr=d_vec.begin();
ADD *addtest=new ADD();
addtest->setPtr(itr);
thrust::for_each(d_vec.begin(), d_vec.end(), *addtest);
for(int i=0;i<3;i++)
cout<<d_vec[i]<<endl;
return 0;
}
When I compile this using nvcc -arch=sm_20 test.cu
I got the following warning:
test.cu(28): warning: calling a host function("thrust::experimental::iterator_facade<thrust::detail::normal_iterator<thrust::device_ptr<int> > , thrust::device_ptr<int> , int, thrust::detail::cuda_device_space_tag, thrust::random_access_traversal_tag, thrust::device_reference<int> , long> ::operator *") from a __device__/__global__ function("printf_functor::add") is not allowed
test.cu(28): warning: calling a host function("thrust::experimental::iterator_facade<thrust::detail::normal_iterator<thrust::device_ptr<int> > , thrust::device_ptr<int> , int, thrust::detail::cuda_device_space_tag, thrust::random_access_traversal_tag, thrust::device_reference<int> , long> ::operator *") from a __device__/__global__ function("printf_functor::add") is not allowed
I cannot get this to compile. How can I solve this problem?
#Gang.Wang: I think you just mixing up 2 different things: all STL-like functionality including for_each, device_vector iterators etc. is just a "facade" which exists on the host only.
While operator() contains the actual GPU code which is compiled to CUDA kernel and applied to each element of your vector in parallel. Hence, device_vector::iterators are not accessible from your functor.