Yea, CG/Jacobi is as close to a benchmark code as we could want. I could run this on one processor to get cleaner numbers.
Is there a designated ECP technical support contact? On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 2:18 PM Barry Smith <bsm...@petsc.dev> wrote: > > I think you should contact the crusher ECP technical support team and > tell them you are getting dismel performance and ask if you should expect > better. Don't waste time flogging a dead horse. > > On Jan 24, 2022, at 2:16 PM, Matthew Knepley <knep...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 2:11 PM Junchao Zhang <junchao.zh...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 12:55 PM Mark Adams <mfad...@lbl.gov> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 1:38 PM Junchao Zhang <junchao.zh...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Mark, I think you can benchmark individual vector operations, and once >>>> we get reasonable profiling results, we can move to solvers etc. >>>> >>> >>> Can you suggest a code to run or are you suggesting making a vector >>> benchmark code? >>> >> Make a vector benchmark code, testing vector operations that would be >> used in your solver. >> Also, we can run MatMult() to see if the profiling result is reasonable. >> Only once we get some solid results on basic operations, it is useful to >> run big codes. >> > > So we have to make another throw-away code? Why not just look at the > vector ops in Mark's actual code? > > Matt > > >> >>> >>>> >>>> --Junchao Zhang >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 12:09 PM Mark Adams <mfad...@lbl.gov> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 12:44 PM Barry Smith <bsm...@petsc.dev> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Here except for VecNorm the GPU is used effectively in that most of >>>>>> the time is time is spent doing real work on the GPU >>>>>> >>>>>> VecNorm 402 1.0 4.4100e-01 6.1 1.69e+09 1.0 0.0e+00 >>>>>> 0.0e+00 4.0e+02 0 1 0 0 20 9 1 0 0 33 30230 225393 0 >>>>>> 0.00e+00 0 0.00e+00 100 >>>>>> >>>>>> Even the dots are very effective, only the VecNorm flop rate over the >>>>>> full time is much much lower than the vecdot. Which is somehow due to the >>>>>> use of the GPU or CPU MPI in the allreduce? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The VecNorm GPU rate is relatively high on Crusher and the CPU rate is >>>>> about the same as the other vec ops. I don't know what to make of that. >>>>> >>>>> But Crusher is clearly not crushing it. >>>>> >>>>> Junchao: Perhaps we should ask Kokkos if they have any experience with >>>>> Crusher that they can share. They could very well find some low level >>>>> magic. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Jan 24, 2022, at 12:14 PM, Mark Adams <mfad...@lbl.gov> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Mark, can we compare with Spock? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Looks much better. This puts two processes/GPU because there are >>>>>> only 4. >>>>>> <jac_out_001_kokkos_Spock_6_1_notpl.txt> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> > > -- > What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their > experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their > experiments lead. > -- Norbert Wiener > > https://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~knepley/ > <http://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~knepley/> > > >
