CUDA Constant Memory Best Practices - cuda

Question

I present here some code
__constant__ int array[1024];
__global__ void kernel1(int *d_dst) {
int tId = threadIdx.x + blockIdx.x * blockDim.x;
d_dst[tId] = array[tId];
}
__global__ void kernel2(int *d_dst, int *d_src) {
int tId = threadIdx.x + blockIdx.x * blockDim.x;
d_dst[tId] = d_src[tId];
}
int main(int argc, char **argv) {
int *d_array;
int *d_src;
cudaMalloc((void**)&d_array, sizeof(int) * 1024);
cudaMalloc((void**)&d_src, sizeof(int) * 1024);
int *test = new int[1024];
memset(test, 0, sizeof(int) * 1024);
for (int i = 0; i < 1024; i++) {
test[i] = 100;
}
cudaMemcpyToSymbol(array, test, sizeof(int) * 1024);
kernel1<<< 1, 1024 >>>(d_array);
cudaMemcpy(d_src, test, sizeof(int) * 1024, cudaMemcpyHostToDevice);
kernel2<<<1, 32 >>>(d_array, d_src),
free(test);
cudaFree(d_array);
cudaFree(d_src);
return 0;
}
Which simply shows constant memory and global memory usage. On its execution the "kernel2" executes about 4 times faster (in terms of time) than "kernel1"
I understand from the Cuda C programming guide, that this this because accesses to constant memory are getting serialized. Which brings me to the idea that constant memory can be best utilized if a warp accesses a single constant value such as integer, float, double etc. but accessing an array is not beneficial at all. In other terms, I can say a warp must access a single address in order to have any beneficial optimization/speedup gains from constant memory access. Is this correct?
I also want to know, if I keep a structure instead of a simple type in my constant memory. Any access to the structure by a thread with in a warp; is also considered as single memory access or more? I mean a structure might contain multiple simple types and array for example; when accessing these simple types, are these accesses also serialized or not?
Last question would be, in case I do have an array with constant values, which needs to be accessed via different threads within a warp; for faster access it should be kept in global memory instead of constant memory. Is that correct?
Anyone can refer me some example code where an efficient constant memory usage is shown.
regards,

Answer 1

I can say a warp must access a single address in order to have any beneficial optimization/speedup gains from constant memory access. Is this correct?
Yes this is generally correct and is the principal intent of usage of constant memory/constant cache. The constant cache can serve up one quantity per SM "at a time". The precise wording is as follows:
The constant memory space resides in device memory and is cached in the constant cache.
A request is then split into as many separate requests as there are different memory addresses in the initial request, decreasing throughput by a factor equal to the number of separate requests.
The resulting requests are then serviced at the throughput of the constant cache in case of a cache hit, or at the throughput of device memory otherwise.
An important takeaway from the text above is the desire for uniform access across a warp to achieve best performance. If a warp makes a request to __constant__ memory where different threads in the warp are accessing different locations, those requests will be serialized. Therefore if each thread in a warp is accessing the same value:
int i = array[20];
then you will have the opportunity for good benefit from the constant cache/memory. If each thread in a warp is accessing a unique quantity:
int i = array[threadIdx.x];
then the accesses will be serialized, and the constant data usage will be disappointing, performance-wise.
I also want to know, if I keep a structure instead of a simple type in my constant memory. Any access to the structure by a thread with in a warp; is also considered as single memory access or more?
You can certainly put structures in constant memory. The same rules apply:
int i = constant_struct_ptr->array[20];
has the opportunity to benefit, but
int i = constant_struct_ptr->array[threadIdx.x];
does not. If you access the same simple type structure element across threads, that is ideal for constant cache usage.
Last question would be, in case I do have an array with constant values, which needs to be accessed via different threads within a warp; for faster access it should be kept in global memory instead of constant memory. Is that correct?
Yes, if you know that in general your accesses will break the constant memory one 32-bit quantity per cycle rule, then you'll probably be better off leaving the data in ordinary global memory.
There are a variety of cuda sample codes that demonstrate usage of __constant__ data. Here are a few:
graphics volumeRender
imaging bilateralFilter
imaging convolutionTexture
finance MonteCarloGPU
and there are others.
EDIT: responding to a question in the comments, if we have a structure like this in constant memory:
struct Simple { int a, int b, int c} s;
And we access it like this:
int p = s.a + s.b + s.c;
^ ^ ^
| | |
cycle: 1 2 3
We will have good usage of the constant memory/cache. When the C code gets compiled, under the hood it will generate machine code accesses corresponding to 1,2,3 in the diagram above. Let's imagine that access 1 occurs first. Since access 1 is to the same memory location independent of which thread in the warp, during cycle 1, all threads will receive the value in s.a and it will take advantage of the cache for best possible benefit. Likewise for accesses 2 and 3. If on the other hand we had:
struct Simple { int a[32], int b[32], int c[32]} s;
...
int idx = threadIdx.x + blockDim.x * blockIdx.x;
int p = s.a[idx] + s.b[idx] + s.c[idx];
This would not give good usage of constant memory/cache. Instead, if this were typical of our accesses to s, we'd probably have better performance locating s in ordinary global memory.