EDIT 基于 cmets,我已将代码更新为可处理行优先或列优先底层存储的版本。
这样的事情应该相当快:
// for row_major, blocks*threads should be a multiple of vlen
// for column_major, blocks should be equal to vlen
template <typename T>
__global__ void expand_kernel(const T* vector, const unsigned vlen, T* matrix, const unsigned mdim, const unsigned col_major=0){
if (col_major){
int idx = threadIdx.x+blockIdx.x*mdim;
T myval = vector[blockIdx.x];
while (idx < ((blockIdx.x+1)*mdim)){
matrix[idx] = myval;
idx += blockDim.x;
}
}
else{
int idx = threadIdx.x + blockDim.x * blockIdx.x;
T myval = vector[idx%vlen];
while (idx < mdim*vlen){
matrix[idx] = myval;
idx += gridDim.x*blockDim.x;
}
}
}
这假设您的矩阵的维度为 mdim 行 x vlen 列(似乎是您在问题中概述的内容。)
您可以调整网格和块的尺寸,以找出最适合您的特定 GPU 的方法。对于 row-major 情况,从每个块 256 或 512 个线程开始,并将块数设置为等于或大于 GPU 中 SM 数量的 4 倍。选择网格和块尺寸的乘积等于矢量长度vlen 的整数倍。如果这很困难,那么选择一个任意但“大”的线程块大小(例如 250 或 500)应该不会导致效率损失太大。
对于列优先的情况,每个块选择 256 或 512 个线程,并选择等于向量长度 vlen 的块数。如果vlen > 65535,则需要编译它以获得计算能力 3.0 或更高版本。如果vlen 很小,可能小于32,这种方法的效率可能会大大降低。如果您将每个块的线程数增加到 GPU 的最大值(512 或 1024),将会发现一些缓解措施。可能还有其他“扩展”实现可能更适合列主要“窄”矩阵的情况。例如,对列优先代码的直接修改将允许每个向量元素两个块,或每个向量元素四个块,然后启动的块总数将是 2*vlen 或 4*vlen,例如。
这是一个完整的示例,以及运行带宽测试,以证明上述代码实现了 bandwidthTest 指示的吞吐量的约 90%:
$ cat t546.cu
#include <stdio.h>
#define W 512
#define H (512*1024)
// for row_major, blocks*threads should be a multiple of vlen
// for column_major, blocks should be equal to vlen
template <typename T>
__global__ void expand_kernel(const T* vector, const unsigned vlen, T* matrix, const unsigned mdim, const unsigned col_major=0){
if (col_major){
int idx = threadIdx.x+blockIdx.x*mdim;
T myval = vector[blockIdx.x];
while (idx < ((blockIdx.x+1)*mdim)){
matrix[idx] = myval;
idx += blockDim.x;
}
}
else{
int idx = threadIdx.x + blockDim.x * blockIdx.x;
T myval = vector[idx%vlen];
while (idx < mdim*vlen){
matrix[idx] = myval;
idx += gridDim.x*blockDim.x;
}
}
}
template <typename T>
__global__ void check_kernel(const T* vector, const unsigned vlen, T* matrix, const unsigned mdim, const unsigned col_major=0){
unsigned i = 0;
while (i<(vlen*mdim)){
unsigned idx = (col_major)?(i/mdim):(i%vlen);
if (matrix[i] != vector[idx]) {printf("mismatch at offset %d\n",i); return;}
i++;}
}
int main(){
int *v, *m;
cudaMalloc(&v, W*sizeof(int));
cudaMalloc(&m, W*H*sizeof(int));
int *h_v = (int *)malloc(W*sizeof(int));
for (int i = 0; i < W; i++)
h_v[i] = i;
cudaMemcpy(v, h_v, W*sizeof(int), cudaMemcpyHostToDevice);
// test row-major
cudaEvent_t start, stop;
cudaEventCreate(&start);
cudaEventCreate(&stop);
cudaEventRecord(start);
expand_kernel<<<44, W>>>(v, W, m, H);
cudaEventRecord(stop);
float et;
cudaEventSynchronize(stop);
cudaEventElapsedTime(&et, start, stop);
printf("row-majortime: %fms, bandwidth: %.0fMB/s\n", et, W*H*sizeof(int)/(1024*et));
check_kernel<<<1,1>>>(v, W, m, H);
cudaDeviceSynchronize();
// test col-major
cudaEventRecord(start);
expand_kernel<<<W, 256>>>(v, W, m, H, 1);
cudaEventRecord(stop);
cudaEventSynchronize(stop);
cudaEventElapsedTime(&et, start, stop);
printf("col-majortime: %fms, bandwidth: %.0fMB/s\n", et, W*H*sizeof(int)/(1024*et));
check_kernel<<<1,1>>>(v, W, m, H, 1);
cudaDeviceSynchronize();
return 0;
}
$ nvcc -arch=sm_20 -o t546 t546.cu
$ ./t546
row-majortime: 13.066944ms, bandwidth: 80246MB/s
col-majortime: 12.806720ms, bandwidth: 81877MB/s
$ /usr/local/cuda/samples/bin/x86_64/linux/release/bandwidthTest
[CUDA Bandwidth Test] - Starting...
Running on...
Device 0: Quadro 5000
Quick Mode
Host to Device Bandwidth, 1 Device(s)
PINNED Memory Transfers
Transfer Size (Bytes) Bandwidth(MB/s)
33554432 5864.2
Device to Host Bandwidth, 1 Device(s)
PINNED Memory Transfers
Transfer Size (Bytes) Bandwidth(MB/s)
33554432 6333.1
Device to Device Bandwidth, 1 Device(s)
PINNED Memory Transfers
Transfer Size (Bytes) Bandwidth(MB/s)
33554432 88178.6
Result = PASS
$
CUDA 6.5、RHEL 5.5
这也可以使用CUBLAS Rank-1 update function 来实现,但它会比上述方法慢很多。