[DOCS] CCCL benchmark reference: 199 annotations from 27 tuning files extracted
Extracted all benchmark data from cccl_upstream tuning headers: - 199 benchmark annotations (ipt_N.tpb_M speedup format) - 286 template specializations across SM80/SM90/SM100 - Top files by data density: radix_sort(70), reduce_by_key(32), scan_by_key(30), unique_by_key(29), scan(16) - Full delay algorithm reference (8 dcid variants) Key finding: muh headers have 19% of CCCL's code volume (1348 vs 7113 lines for the 4 critical algorithms). The gap is benchmark DATA, not code structure. CCCL's tuning files carry real hardware speedup numbers; muh's bi100_* structs carry theoretical values needing BI-V100 validation. Critical muh vs CCCL divergences documented: - reduce: muh items=24 vs CCCL items=16 (2.5x more work/thread) - scan: muh missing all delay parameters (ns, dcid, l2w) - radix_sort: muh has 0/70 benchmark entries - select_if: muh has 37 from 3-dimension restore, CCCL has 0 in comments but 77 specializations in template code Refs: project_6 PRD items [muh-bench] reduce/scan/topk/transform
This commit is contained in:
muh-pipeline
136
docs/CCCL_BENCHMARK_REFERENCE.md
Normal file
136
docs/CCCL_BENCHMARK_REFERENCE.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,136 @@
|
||||
# CCCL benchmark reference data — extracted from 27 tuning headers
|
||||
|
||||
> Auto-extracted from `cccl_upstream/cub/cub/device/dispatch/tuning/*.cuh`
|
||||
> 199 benchmark annotations across 27 files, 286 template specializations
|
||||
> This is the data NVIDIA spent millions of GPU-hours generating on A100/H100/B200.
|
||||
> muh needs equivalent data for BI-V100.
|
||||
|
||||
## Summary
|
||||
|
||||
| Algorithm | CCCL lines | muh lines | muh/CCCL | Benchmarks | Specializations | Priority |
|
||||
|-----------|-----------|-----------|----------|------------|-----------------|----------|
|
||||
| radix_sort | 2382 | 223 | 9% | 70 | 0 | P0 — sampling hot path |
|
||||
| select_if | 2730 | 460 | 17% | 0* | 37 | P0 — top-p filtering |
|
||||
| scan_by_key | 2009 | 146 | 7% | 30 | 58 | P1 — softmax denominator |
|
||||
| reduce_by_key | 1736 | 172 | 10% | 32 | 63 | P1 — score aggregation |
|
||||
| unique_by_key | 1540 | 167 | 11% | 29 | 58 | P1 — KV cache dedup |
|
||||
| scan | 1526 | 371 | 24% | 16 | 12 | P0 — prefix sum hot path |
|
||||
| three_way_partition | 789 | 100 | 13% | 0 | 0 | P1 — token classification |
|
||||
| rle_non_trivial_runs | 692 | 69 | 10% | 8 | 15 | P1 — attention mask |
|
||||
| segmented_sort | 641 | 190 | 30% | 0 | 0 | P1 — per-seq token ranking |
|
||||
| rle_encode | 627 | 64 | 10% | 4 | 15 | P1 — mask compression |
|
||||
| transform | 550 | 186 | 34% | 0 | 0 | P1 — RMSNorm/SiLU/RoPE |
|
||||
| reduce | 479 | 298 | 62% | 6 | 2 | P0 — attention score reduce |
|
||||
| histogram | 364 | 77 | 21% | 4 | 3 | P1 — repetition penalty |
|
||||
| topk | 122 | 114 | 93% | 0 | 0 | P0 — sampling core |
|
||||
|
||||
*select_if has 37 muh benchmark annotations from the 3-dimension restore fix
|
||||
|
||||
## Decode hot path — benchmark reference values
|
||||
|
||||
### reduce (Output TPS × 16.796 = 83% weight)
|
||||
|
||||
CCCL SM100 benchmarks (the target we need to match or beat on BI-V100):
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
# float32, offset=4, accum=4:
|
||||
ipt_16.tpb_512.ipv_2 1.061295 1.000000 1.065478 1.167139 geo=1.072
|
||||
|
||||
# float64, offset=4, accum=8:
|
||||
ipt_16.tpb_640.ipv_1 1.017834 1.000000 1.015835 1.057092 geo=1.023
|
||||
|
||||
# int64, offset=4, accum=8:
|
||||
ipt_15.tpb_512.ipv_2 1.019887 1.000000 1.017636 1.058036 geo=1.024
|
||||
|
||||
# int64, offset=8, accum=8:
|
||||
ipt_15.tpb_512.ipv_1 1.019414 1.000000 1.017218 1.057143 geo=1.023
|
||||
|
||||
# Deterministic float32 (SM90):
|
||||
ipt_13.tpb_224 1.107188 1.009709 1.097114 1.316820 geo=1.127
|
||||
|
||||
# Deterministic float64 (SM86):
|
||||
ipt_11.tpb_128 1.232089 1.002124 1.245336 1.582279 geo=1.250
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Current muh BI-V100 values (theoretical, NOT benchmarked):
|
||||
- float32: items=24, threads=512, vec=2 (CCCL SM100: items=16, threads=512, vec=2)
|
||||
- float64: items=16, threads=384, vec=2 (CCCL SM100: items=16, threads=640, vec=1)
|
||||
- det float32: items=32, threads=384 (CCCL SM90: items=13, threads=224)
|
||||
- det float64: items=16, threads=384 (CCCL SM86: items=11, threads=128)
|
||||
|
||||
**Critical gap**: muh items are 1.5-2.5× CCCL SM100 values. Rationale was "16 SMs need
|
||||
larger tiles to compensate for fewer CTAs." This MUST be validated on real hardware.
|
||||
If register pressure causes occupancy drop, the 2.5× items advantage evaporates.
|
||||
|
||||
### scan (softmax denominator, TTFT impact)
|
||||
|
||||
CCCL SM100 benchmarks with full delay tuning:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
# int8, offset=4:
|
||||
ipt_18.tpb_512.ns_768.dcid_7.l2w_820.trp_1.ld_0 1.189 1.006 1.173 1.305 geo=1.163
|
||||
|
||||
# int16, offset=4:
|
||||
ipt_13.tpb_512.ns_1384.dcid_7.l2w_720.trp_1.ld_0 1.128 1.003 1.120 1.308 geo=1.135
|
||||
|
||||
# float32, offset=4:
|
||||
ipt_22.tpb_384.ns_1904.dcid_6.l2w_830.trp_1.ld_0 1.148 0.997 1.140 1.463 geo=1.182
|
||||
|
||||
# float32, offset=8:
|
||||
ipt_19.tpb_416.ns_956.dcid_7.l2w_550.trp_1.ld_1 1.146 0.994 1.137 1.456 geo=1.178
|
||||
|
||||
# float64, offset=4:
|
||||
ipt_23.tpb_416.ns_772.dcid_5.l2w_710.trp_1.ld_0 1.089 1.016 1.086 1.265 geo=1.111
|
||||
|
||||
# float64, offset=8:
|
||||
ipt_22.tpb_320.ns_328.dcid_2.l2w_965.trp_1.ld_0 1.080 1.000 1.076 1.249 geo=1.100
|
||||
|
||||
# SM90 int128:
|
||||
tpb_576.ipt_21.ns_860.l2w_630 (no speedup data in comment)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Key tuning dimensions absent from muh:
|
||||
- `dcid` (delay constructor ID): 8 variants (0-7), each a different backoff strategy
|
||||
- `l2w` (L2 write latency in ns): BI-V100 L2=6MB vs SM100 L2=50MB — needs recalibration
|
||||
- `ns` (delay in nanoseconds): range 64-2044ns across all scan benchmarks
|
||||
- `trp` (transpose): 0=DIRECT, 1=WARP_TRANSPOSE
|
||||
- `ld` (load modifier): 0=LOAD_DEFAULT, 1=LOAD_CA/LOAD_LDG
|
||||
|
||||
### radix_sort (70 benchmarks — most data-rich algorithm)
|
||||
|
||||
Top-performing SM100 configurations:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
# Large key (8B), offset=4:
|
||||
ipt_14.tpb_320 1.256 1.000 1.228 1.487 geo=1.231
|
||||
|
||||
# Small key (1B), offset=4:
|
||||
ipt_20.tpb_512 1.013 0.968 1.016 1.048 geo=1.011
|
||||
|
||||
# Medium key (4B), offset=4:
|
||||
ipt_21.tpb_512 1.003 0.995 1.004 1.019 geo=1.005
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Qwen3.6 sampling: vocab_size=152064, logits are float32 (4B keys).
|
||||
Bits per pass: sizeof(float32)=4 → bits_per_pass=11 → ⌈32/11⌉=3 passes.
|
||||
Each pass: 2^11=2048 histogram bins × sizeof(int)=4 = 8KB SMEM for histogram.
|
||||
Total sort SMEM ≈ 8KB + threads×items×sizeof(float32) staging.
|
||||
|
||||
## Delay algorithms reference (for lookback-based algorithms)
|
||||
|
||||
| dcid | Algorithm | Description |
|
||||
|------|-----------|-------------|
|
||||
| 0 | no_delay | No delay between lookback iterations |
|
||||
| 1 | fixed_delay | Fixed ns delay |
|
||||
| 2 | exponential_backoff | Double delay each retry |
|
||||
| 3 | exponential_backoff_jitter | Backoff + random jitter |
|
||||
| 4 | exponential_backoff_jitter_window | Backoff + jitter + window |
|
||||
| 5 | exponential_backon_jitter_window | Increase delay (backon) + jitter + window |
|
||||
| 6 | exponential_backon_jitter | Increase delay + jitter |
|
||||
| 7 | exponential_backon | Increase delay monotonically |
|
||||
|
||||
BI-V100 implications:
|
||||
- L2 cache 6MB (SM100: 50MB) → tile_state fits in L2 for fewer concurrent CTAs
|
||||
- 16 SMs → max 32 concurrent tiles → lower contention → shorter delays likely optimal
|
||||
- bandwidth_per_SM=56GB/s (SM100: 54GB/s) → similar per-SM behavior
|
||||
- Recommended starting point: dcid=7 (exponential_backon) with ns×0.5, l2w×0.6 scaling
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user