Halide Talk
Andrew Adams5 HN recommenders · 2014–2021
53K views · talk · evergreen · Uploaded 2014-04-24
Andrew Adams, a Halide developer, presents the Halide language for image processing and tensor computation. The talk explains the separation of algorithm from schedule with illustrated examples of parallelism, locality and redundancy tradeoffs.
Recommended as the clearest explanation of Halide's ideas and of scheduling for performance.
49:55How Python was Shaped by leaky Internals, Armin Ronacher, Flask framework
Видео с мероприятий {speach!
24:26The Beauty of Bézier Curves
Freya Holmér
36:45Rich Harris - Rethinking reactivity
You Gotta Love Frontend
1:13:50The Continuity of Splines
Freya Holmér
1:12:27CppCon 2015: Andrei Alexandrescu “std::allocator...”
CppCon
51:18Lexical Scanning in Go - Rob Pike
GoogleFOSSSydney
1:31:06William Byrd on "The Most Beautiful Program Ever Written" [PWL NYC]
PapersWeLove
3:36elevated by Rgba & TBC | 4k intro (FullHD 1080p demoscene demo)
Demoscene High-Quality Videos (Annikras)
7 comments from Hacker News
You can see it a little bit in the blur example on the front page: the blur algorithm is described in two lines and the optimizations are described separately in the "schedule" below. In this case the schedule specifies that intermediate results should be computed in tiles of a certain size, and the whole thing is both vectorized and parallelized. The best way to understand it is probably to watch the video, which is relatively long but explains things clearly: [VIDEO]
Halide is an interesting direction for generating optimized code. By isolating algorithm from schedule, it is better able to optimize for vectorization, locality, pipelining, threading, tiling, and recomputation vs. storage. It then uses LLVM to do all the ordinary optimization. Example code: // The algorithm - no storage or order blur_x(x, y) = (input(x-1, y) + input(x, y) + input(x+1, y))/3; blur_y(x, y) = (blur_x(x, y-1) + blur_x(x, y) + blur_x(x, y+1))/3; // The schedule - defines order, locality; implies storage blur_y.tile(x, y, xi, yi, 256, 32) .vectorize(xi, 8).parallel(y); blur_x.compute_at(blur_y, x).vectorize(x, 8); Halide can auto-optimize to create schedules for specific architectures, which can match or exceed performance of C code written by experts. It's intended for image processing, and has an unnatural affinity for rectangles, but it's an interesting direction for optimization. Darkroom does similar optimization for FPGAs Website: [LINK] Video: [VIDEO] Paper: [LINK]
please look at [LINK] and especially [VIDEO] they seem to open new ground in the area you are prusuing edit: if you know any other groups/ppl who practice a similar approach send them my way anyhow, it seems like the hand written assembly vs compiled code goes in to a new skirmish the age where the whole spectrum from generalcpu > asic becomes available to programmers all around bottle necks of parallelism, locality and redundancy seems to be the guiding lights hand written we'll be probably lead by the magnificent [LINK] compiler generated by halide and the like and once we got the ball rolling and more public knowledge is available probably the locked down techniques of the major supercomputers will start to emerge ( i just assume pps from the supercomputers area have been dealing with this stuff for the last couple of decades ) can i spit some more, dear hacker news? focus, you gotta focus, forget about the compiler generating good code, it's all about the ability for us humans to explore the domain even in halide, they mention the point that you still need to sit down and code different approaches, but their tool makes it a breeze compared to exploring those different approaches using hand written assembly
A really nice video with animations of various scheduling approaches for these types of linear algebra algorithms: [VIDEO]
Halide! That's the one I was thinking of: [VIDEO] I'd love to find out if this could be a more generally-applicable technique, but it's fascinating regardless.
[VIDEO] Here is a relevant video from the creator. It has some fun illustrations to help with what its going on. /edit - letters
This is what I was trying to get at - using column vectors gives good cache locality and lets you use SIMD for "multiply all of these by this scalar" for each column, and then for "sum all of these" for the resulting rows. I'd imagine it could also let you optimize multiplications into things like bit-shifts with minimal overhead as well, though I have no idea if that's done in practice. Maybe only tangentially related, but I feel like this talk on Halide[0] is really illustrative of the general concepts. As others have mentioned, for some operations it can also save you from loading whole columns that aren't relevant for your transformation. The compression point in the sibling comment is definitely also relevant, especially for serialization. A whole lot of reasons to use column vectors. Using "column-major" here might've been terminology abuse; sorry for the confusion. [0] [VIDEO]