Skip to content

non-literal workgroup size #299

Open
@Firestar99

Description

@Firestar99

Original discussion in #298

Currently, workgroup size must be a number literal and does not accept const expr. So to have a const if your workgroup size, you must copy-paste the literal in two / three locations:

pub const LIGHTING_WG_SIZE: u32 = 64;

const_assert_eq!(LIGHTING_WG_SIZE, 64);
#[bindless(compute(threads(64)))]
pub fn lighting_cs(...) { ... }

I'd much rather have the proc macro accept a const expr instead of a literal, so we can do this:

pub const LIGHTING_WG_SIZE: u32 = 64;

#[bindless(compute(threads(LIGHTING_WG_SIZE)))]
pub fn lighting_cs(...) { ... }

Alternative: WorkgroupSize builtin

The WorkgroupSize builtin as in #298 is not sufficient for these use-cases:

  1. Accessing the workgroup size from the CPU code to compute the workgroup dimensions:
let groups = [
	(image_size.x + LIGHTING_WG_SIZE - 1) / LIGHTING_WG_SIZE,
	image_size.y,
	1,
];
  1. Declare shared memory as a multiple of the workgroup size:
pub const DIRECTIONAL_SHADOWS_WG_SIZE: u32 = 64;
const SHARED_SIZE: usize = DIRECTIONAL_SHADOWS_WG_SIZE as usize * 2;

const_assert_eq!(DIRECTIONAL_SHADOWS_WG_SIZE, 64);
#[bindless(compute(threads(64)))]
pub fn directional_shadows(
    #[spirv(workgroup)] shared: &[f32; SHARED_SIZE],
) { ... }

Potential Implementation Path

I wonder if we actually need to parse out the actual value within that macro....

Currently we're emitting this, for which we clearly need to parse the literals:

     OpEntryPoint GLCompute %3 "lighting_cs" %bla %bla2 %bla3
     OpExecutionMode %3 LocalSize 64 1 1
%3 = OpFunction %void None %443

But with Vulkan1.2 we get the new fancy LocalSizeId instead of LocalSize, so we can do this:

%4 = OpTypeInt 32 0
     OpDecorate %5 SpecId 123
%5 = OpSpecConstant %4 64
%6 = OpConstant %4 1
     OpEntryPoint GLCompute %3 "lighting_cs" %bla %bla2 %bla3
     OpExecutionMode %3 LocalSizeId %5 %6 %6
%3 = OpFunction %void None %443

Note how at the point we're writing the OpExecutionMode we don't actually write any literaly, just references to constants. Why couldn't they be references to actual constants in rust code? And if we have number literals, we can still parse and emit them as constants. It would also open up a path towards workgroup size being a spec constant, see %5.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    enhancementNew feature or request

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions