What is the fastest way to update a single float value to the GPU to access it in a CUDA kernel?

user_7745011 0
Viewed 575

I have a opengl particle simulation, where the position of each particle is calculated in a CUDA kernel. Most memory resides within the GPU memory, but there is a single float value, I have to update from the CPU each frame.

At the moment I use cudaMemcpyAsync() to copy the float value to the GPU, but (at least from what I can tell), this slows down the performance quite a bit. I tried to use nvproof to see, which calls take the longest, with these results:

Calls    Avg       Min       Max   Name
477  2.9740us  2.8160us  4.5440us  simulation(float3*, float*, float3*, float*)
477  89.033us  18.600us  283.00us  cudaLaunchKernel
477  47.819us  10.200us  120.70us  cudaMemcpyAsync

I think I can't really do much about the kernel launch itself, but from the calls, that happen every frame cudaMemcpyAsync() seems to be taking the longest.

I have also tried to use pinned memory and cudaHostGetDevicePointer() as described here, however for some reason this increases the kernel launch times even more, making more than up for the time saved for not needing the memcopy function.

I guess there has to be a better/faster way to update my single float variable to the GPU?

cuda
1 Answers

Easiest way is, that you can add an extra parameter to the simulation kernel function as a value of simple float but not as a pointer to float so that the data goes directly by the kernel launch parameters structure that CUDA sends to GPU when you launch the kernel. Then you evade that data copy command altogether. (I'm assuming CUDA packs whole function parameter descriptor data of kernel into a single copy command because kernel parameter descriptor space is limited by a few kBs or less).

simulation(fooPointer, 
           barPointer, 
           fooBarPointer, 
           floatVariable 
);

Or, try double buffering between data update and rendering or between data update and compute so that simulation image follows the simulation calculation by 1-2 frames behind (and per-frame time gets worse) but "frames per second" increases.

If its not an interactive simulation, hiding compute/render/data latencies by double or triple buffering should work.

If you are after minimizing per-frame timing (quicker response to a user-input into simulation?) then you should embed the float variable to the end of an array that you already send/use in simulation or whatever structure you are using. If you already have a 1MB+ float buffer to send to GPU, then appending 4B(float) to end of it should not make much difference then you can access it from there. 1 copy operation should be faster than 2 copy operations with same total size.

If you are literally sending just 4B to GPU at each frame (with a simple function to generate that data), then (as 3Dave said in comments) you can try adding an extra kernel function to update the value in the GPU and just have the overhead of kernel launch command instead of both copy command overhead and data copy overhead. On a positive side, that extra kernel overhead might be hidden if there is a "graph" of kernels running for each frame automatically without enqueueing all of them again and again.

Here,

https://devblogs.nvidia.com/cuda-graphs/

The part

We are going to create a simple code which mimics this pattern. We will then use this to demonstrate the overheads involved with the standard launch mechanism and show how to introduce a CUDA Graph comprising the multiple kernels, which can be launched from the application in a single operation.

cudaGraphLaunch(instance, stream);

They say per-kernel launch overhead in this "graph" feature is only 3-4 microseconds when there are many(20) kernels in the algorithm.

Since graph supports other commands too, you can try both copy and compute parts in parallel cuda-streams within a graph and switch their inputs with double buffering so all CUDA things can stay within CUDA's context before sending output to rendering.

(Maybe)You don't even have to change the data mechanism at all. Just try sending data of float as binary representation into the pointer value and only read the pointer value (not data value) from kernel and convert it back to float. I don't know if CUDA returns an error for this if you don't try reaching the (wrong) pointer address that the float data represents, in the kernel.

simulation(fooPointer, 
           barPointer, 
           fooBarPointer, 
           toPtr(floatData) // <----- float to 64/32 bit pointer value
);

and in kernel

float val = fromPtrToFloat(parameter4); // converts pointer itself, not the data

But this may not be a preferred practice if you can simply use "value" type parameters.

user_14700920
Related