oleksandr-pavlyk commented on PR #34972: URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/34972#issuecomment-1522131776
I was referring to the comment as I understood it: > Just to clarify: are we considering that we'd add the Event to the ArrowDeviceArray struct and remove the stream argument from the get_next ? In SYCL, the stream corresponds to in-order `sycl::queue` which provides a way to retrieve the `sycl::context` associated with USM allocation. Now that I reread your comment, I see that I _misunderstood_ the comment. It is not stating that stream is going to be removed from the `ArrowDeviceArray` structure, but rather only from arguments of `get_next`. Focusing on the synchronization question part only from now on. Event-based synchronization is _cheaper_ than stream-based one (since it requires submitting queue barriers), at least in the SYCL world. Additionally, stream-based synchronization is not even possible with current SYCL 2020 without leveraging `oneapi_queue_barrier` extension. This may be a weaker argument since the entire enterprise of sharing USM allocations without explicitly sharing underlying context requires an extensions too. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
