No, kernel attached, call statement too.
With scatter stream I recived much worse timings so kernel was rearranged to use gather and ordinal streams only.
Any thoughts?
Kernel: kernel void GPU_fetch_array_kernel94t(float src[],int offsets[][],float freq[],out float4 dest<>){ //R: here we should form dest buffer element one by one, no arrays inside kernel allowed //So we should return back to initial fetch order that was so unoptimal for CPU version //will hope here access to memory with stride will not degrade performance so much as it was for CPU version int j=instance().y; int threadID=instance().x; int k=0; int l=0; float4 acc=float4(0.f,0.f,0.f,0.f); float f=freq[threadID]; //double period=periods[threadID];//(double)sub_buffer_size/(double)f; int n_per=(int)f; for(k=0;k<n_per;k++){ l=offsets[threadID]; l+=(4*j);//R: index to data array computed acc.x+=src; acc.y+=src[l+1]; acc.z+=src[l+2]; acc.w+=src[l+3]; } dest=acc; } And this is kernel call: {Timings<T_Stream> cc; //fprintf(stderr,"gpu_offsets.before read\n"); {Timings<T_Stream1> c1; gpu_offsets->read(offsets); do{ Sleep(7);fprintf(stderr,"offsets_sleep\n"); }while(!gpu_offsets->isSync()); } //fprintf(stderr,"gpu_offsets.finish\n"); //GPU_fetch_array_kernel5.domainOffset(uint4(0,t_offset,0,0)); //GPU_fetch_array_kernel5.domainSize(uint4(1,sb_size,1,1)); {Timings<T_Stream2> c2; GPU_fetch_array_kernel94t(gpu_data,*gpu_offsets,/**gpu_per_int,*/gpu_freqs,*gpu_temp); } } do{ Sleep(sleep_fetch); }while(!gpu_temp->isSync()); Timings<> template constructor/destructor pair just call rdtsc and register ticks count difference. Its overhead ~1e2 ticks while kernel call took 1e6 to 1e8 ticks (see first post)
