creation 2D grid in CUDA for GPGPU using C++ - cuda

Question

I am trying to extend my grid from a 1d to a 2d grid. Is there any way to do this?
Here is my current code:
int idx = threadIdx.x + blockDim.x * blockIdx.x;
In the #include list I have these definitions:
#define BLOCKS_PER_GRID 102
#define THREADS_PER_BLOCK 1024

Answer 1

Given that you want 1024 threads per block, the block can be easily reshaped to 2D.
32 x 32 = 1024;
So your block will look like this:
dim3 Block(32,32); //1024 threads per block. Will only work for devices of at least 2.0 Compute Capability.
I don't know what is your exact requirement, but usually number of blocks is not fixed (as you have defined in the macro). The number of blocks depend on the input data size, so that the grid scales dynamically.
Going with you case, you have many options, but the nearest optimal size for your grid comes out to be 17 x 6 or 6 x 17.
dim3 Grid(17,6);
Now you can call the kernel with these parameters:
kernel<<<Grid,Block>>>();
Inside the kernel, the 2-Dimensional index of the thread is calculated as follows:
int xIndex = blockIdx.x * blockDim.x + threadIdx.x;
int yIndex = blockIdx.y * blockDim.y + threadIdx.y;
Or if you follow the Row/Column convention instead of x/y, then:
int row = blockIdx.y * blockDim.y + threadIdx.y;
int column = blockIdx.x * blockDim.x + threadIdx.x;

Answer 2

You can also have a 2D grid of 1-dimensional threadblocks, in order to get around the limitation of 65535 blocks per grid dimension (for pre-cc3.0 devices). This may be an easier way of extending a fundamentally 1-D problem past the limit without introducing a 2-D array representation for the data.
Let's assume we have a DATA_ELEMENTS parameter defined to be the number of elements (one element per thread) that your kernel will work on. If DATA_ELEMENTS is larger than 65535*1024, then you cannot handle them all using a 1-D grid, if each thread handles only 1 element.
you can leave your THREADS_PER_BLOCK parameter the same. Your thread index calculation inside the kernel will change to something like:
int idx = threadIdx.x + (blockDim.x * ((gridDim.x * blockIdx.y) + blockIdx.x));
you will want to be sure to condition your kernel calculations with something like:
if (idx < DATA_ELEMENTS){
(kernel code)
}
Your grid dimensions will be as follows:
dim3 grid;
if (DATA_ELEMENTS > (65535*THREADS_PER_BLOCK)){ // create a 2-D grid
int gridx = 65535; // could choose another number here
int gridy = ((DATA_ELEMENTS+(THREADS_PER_BLOCK-1))/THREADS_PER_BLOCK)/gridx;
if ((((DATA_ELEMENTS+(THREADS_PER_BLOCK-1))/THREADS_PER_BLOCK)%gridx) != 0) gridy++;
grid.x=gridx;
grid.y=gridy;
grid.z=1;
}
else{ // create a 1-D grid
int gridx = (DATA_ELEMENTS+(THREADS_PER_BLOCK-1))/THREADS_PER_BLOCK;
grid.x=gridx;
grid.y=1;
grid.z=1;
}
and you would launch your kernel as:
kernel<<<grid, THREADS_PER_BLOCK>>>(...);
Another method to tackle this kind of problem is to create a 1-D grid of some dimension (let's say the total number of threads in the grid is NUM_THREADS_PER_GRID), and have each thread work on more than one element in the array of data elements, using something like a for-loop or while-loop:
while (idx < DATA_ELEMENTS) {
(code to process an element)
idx += NUM_THREADS_PER_GRID
}

Answer 3

I like Robert's solutions above. The only comment I have about his first solution is that it seems that one should make gridx as small as one can when DATA_ELEMENTS > (65535*THREADS_PER_BLOCK). The reason is that if the number of data elements is 65535*THREADS_PER_BLOCK + 1, and gridx is 65535, then 65535*2*THREADS_PER_BLOCK are launched, so almost half of the threads will do nothing. If gridx is smaller, then there will be less threads that do nothing.