[SYCL] Enable discard_events mode for the Level Zero #6533
Conversation
|
/verify with intel/llvm-test-suite#1132 |
|
/verify with intel/llvm-test-suite#1132 |
|
/verify with intel/llvm-test-suite#1132 |
|
SYCL/Plugin/level_zero_events_caching.cpp failure is unrelated to this PR, fix is uploaded for review here: intel/llvm-test-suite#1138 HIP backend failures are unrelated because changes are isolated to L0 plugin. |
|
@smaslov-intel Could you please review this PR? |
|
|
||
| // Indicates that event is internal, i.e. it is visible inside the L0 plugin | ||
| // only. | ||
| bool Internal = {false}; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we instead do similar as we do for queue
llvm/sycl/plugins/level_zero/pi_level_zero.hpp
Line 1038 in bfc7e98
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If we do optimization (2-event model) only for discarded events in in-order queue then bool variable seems enough. But if we want to extend optimization for events which are not discarded then we need this ref count of external references to know when event is not externally visible anymore.
So I used the ext ref count approach as suggested.
* Use RefCountExternal to keep track of external references * Rename PI_EXT_ONEAPI_QUEUE_DISCARD_EVENTS_MODE_ENABLE -> PI_EXT_ONEAPI_QUEUE_DISCARD_EVENTS * Pass property to all backends
| if (CommandList != Queue->CommandListMap.end()) { | ||
| CommandList->second.append(*Event); | ||
| PI_CALL(piEventRetain(*Event)); | ||
| (*Event)->RefCount.increment(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just curious: why is this change needed?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
piEventRetain increments external ref count, but we need to increment only internal ref count here. Same logic as for pi_queue.
2 participants
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.