You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The current way of processing double buffering is to simply unroll the loops, and thus doesn't show performance improvement compared to single buffering.
We probably want to apply correct loop pipelining to hide some memory access latency (although I'm not sure how much improvement it can bring). A simple loop pipelining strategy is as
load (A[0], B[0])
load (A[1], B[1])
matmul(A[0], B[0])
write (C[0])
for i = 2, ... n {
load(A[i], B[i])
matmul(A[i-1], B[i-1])
write(C[i-1])
}
matmul(A[n], B[n])
write (C[n])
Currently there are double buffers in both L2 and L1, and another question is whether we need double buffers for both inputs and outputs in L2. The idea behind this is we'd want to free some memory so that a larger tile size can be used.
The current way of processing double buffering is to simply unroll the loops, and thus doesn't show performance improvement compared to single buffering.
We probably want to apply correct loop pipelining to hide some memory access latency (although I'm not sure how much improvement it can bring). A simple loop pipelining strategy is as
Currently there are double buffers in both L2 and L1, and another question is whether we need double buffers for both inputs and outputs in L2. The idea behind this is we'd want to free some memory so that a larger tile size can be used.
CC: @jtuyls @MaheshRavishankar
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: