• PAPPP@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Neat.

    I set up some basic compute stuff with the ROCm stack on a 6900HX-based mini computer the other week (mostly to see if it was possible as there are some image processing workloads a colleague was hoping to accelerate on a similar host) and noticed that the docs occasionally pretend you could use GTT dynamicly allocated memory for compute tasks, but there was no evidence of it ever having worked for anyone.

    That machine had flexible firmware and 64GB of RAM stuffed in it so I just shuffled the boot time allocation in the EFI to give 8GB to the GPU to make it work, but it’s not elegant.

    It’s also pretty clumsy to actually make things run, lot of “set the magic environment variable because the tool chain will mis-detect the architecture of your unsupported card” and “Inject this wall of text into your CMake list to override libraries with our cooked versions” to make things work. Then it performs like an old GTX1060, which is on one hand impressive for an integrated part in a fairly low wattage machine, and on the other hand is competing with a low-mid range card from 2016.

    Pretty on brand really, they’ve been fucking up their compute stack since before any other vendor was doing the GPGPU thing (abandoning CTM for Stream in like a year).

    I think the OpenMP situation was the least jank of the ways I tried getting something to offload on an APU, but it was also one of the later attempts so maybe I was just getting used to it’s shit.

    • wewbull@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      “set the magic environment variable because the tool chain will mis-detect the architecture of your unsupported card”

      I don’t think it’s misdetecting it. Rather it detects it correctly, tries to use specific support for that device, but then finds that the support was switched off at compile time. The environment variable forces it to pretend to be a different (very similar) device.

      Clunky, yes.