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
makes the timing more accurate, and also shows that kfusion is around 10% faster than measured with the old way.
CUDA kernels are asynchronous. Timing information can really only be measured after cudaDeviceSynchronize(), but kfusion doesn't do that in many places (apart from the total time, which consequently is correct). Adding it before each Stats.sample fixes that, and and changes my measurement for integrate from 0.00* milliseconds to 3.* milliseconds, which makes a lot of sense.
Note though that cudaDeviceSynchronize() can slow things sometimes, but hasn't done so in my measurements.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I found two problems with the way kfusion measures how long the individual kernels take:
return double(std::clock())/CLOCKS_PER_SEC
This is not an atomic clock, and worse it depends on the CPU activity. Changing it to
makes the timing more accurate, and also shows that kfusion is around 10% faster than measured with the old way.
cudaDeviceSynchronize()
, but kfusion doesn't do that in many places (apart from thetotal
time, which consequently is correct). Adding it before eachStats.sample
fixes that, and and changes my measurement forintegrate
from0.00*
milliseconds to3.*
milliseconds, which makes a lot of sense.Note though that
cudaDeviceSynchronize()
can slow things sometimes, but hasn't done so in my measurements.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: