Paper detail

Analyzing Search Techniques for Autotuning Image-based GPU Kernels: The Impact of Sample Sizes

Modern computing systems are increasingly more complex, with their multicore CPUs and GPUs accelerators changing yearly, if not more often. It thus has become very challenging to write programs that efficiently use the associated complex memory systems and take advantage of the available parallelism. Autotuning addresses this by optimizing parameterized code to the targeted hardware by searching for the optimal set of parameters. Empirical autotuning has therefore gained interest during the past decades. While new autotuning algorithms are regularly presented and published, we will show why comparing these autotuning algorithms is a deceptively difficult task. In this paper, we describe our empirical study of state-of-the-art search techniques for autotuning by comparing them on a range of sample sizes, benchmarks and architectures. We optimize 6 tunable parameters with a search-space size of over 2 million. The algorithms studied include Random Search (RS), Random Forest Regression (RF), Genetic Algorithms (GA), Bayesian Optimization with Gaussian Processes (BO GP) and Bayesian Optimization with Tree-Parzen Estimators (BO TPE). Our results on the ImageCL benchmark suite suggest that the ideal autotuning algorithm heavily depends on the sample size. In our study, BO GP and BO TPE outperform the other algorithms in most scenarios with sample sizes from 25 to 100. However, GA usually outperforms the others for sample sizes 200 and beyond. We generally see the most speedup to be gained over RS in the lower range of sample sizes (25-100). However, the algorithms more consistently outperform RS for higher sample sizes (200-400). Hence, no single state-of-the-art algorithm outperforms the rest for all sample sizes. Some suggestions for future work are also included.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.