# [HLSL] inefficent function

This topic is 2781 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

## Recommended Posts

Hey,

in my shader I use a function that stores and returns the resulting data in two arrays. Everything works correctly but I assume it is very bad style of coding.
The result is correct, but the bigger those arrays are, the longer the program takes to start and the lower the framerate.

Here the relevant code snippets:

 struct RET { float a1[10][20]; float a2[10][20]; }; static float array1[10][20]; static float array2[10][20]; 

 RET foo1() { RET r; // write and read array1 and array2 r.a1 = array1; r.a2 = array2; return r; } 

Well, this is awkward but it was the only way to get it working.

I actually don't see any reason for array1 and array2 to be static and global. But if I try it like follows the program throws an error message at start:

 RET foo2() { RET r; // write and read r.a1 and r.a2 return r; } 

1. Is this behaviour comprehensible?

2. How could I realize my task in a proper and more efficient way?

3. Do I maybe need to pack the data into float4s?

##### Share on other sites
So basically the question is: how to effectively write and read two-dimensional data in the shader.

##### Share on other sites
Could you explain what you're actually trying to implement here?

##### Share on other sites

Could you explain what you're actually trying to implement here?

I implemented an iterative solution of a recursion.

Based on two input variables and certain criteria the result is computed bottom up, so that the actual result is in the very first line of the array.
( i.e. it would be enough to return the first lines of both arrays, I just realized )

During the execution of the function both the arrays are written and read.

I have to add that the mentioned effects ( longer launch time, lower fps ) are not occuring because the function complexity increases with increasing array size.
Even if I only operate within [5][10], but declare the array as [10][20] the effects appear.

##### Share on other sites
Anyone an idea maybe? Is the problem description still unclear?

As I said, everything works correctly but here an example how the performance is related to the array size:

static array1[5][7] static array2[5][7]  launch time: 5 seconds
fps: 50

static array1[17][31] static array2[17][31]  launch time: 80 seconds
fps: 12

The computational effort of the function is the same, as I use in both cases only the first 5 lines and the first 7 columns of the array.
So there's something terribly wrong with those arrays.

Any help would be much appreciated!

##### Share on other sites
So if I understand you correctly, you just have a 2D array of temporary data that is written to and read by your shader program?

If that is the case, my guess would be that the array is consuming large numbers of registers, which is hurting performance. GPU's have a fixed-size register file per processor, and the (potentially thousands) of threads in flight on a single unit must share that register space. Consuming too many registers per thread means that the GPU can not keep as many threads in flight simultaneously, which can significantly hinder performance. However this is just a guess, and you would have to confirm using vendor-specific profiling/analysis tools.

##### Share on other sites

So if I understand you correctly, you just have a 2D array of temporary data that is written to and read by your shader program?

Thank's for you answer!

That's right. The function uses internally two 2D arrays for computation and returns two 1D arrays (i've changed that now). Do you have any proposals how to circumvent the problem?

What I still don't get: why can't I just declare the arrays within the function? As they are only used by this function, I don't see any reason for them to be global and static.
Is there any reasonable explanation or might this be only a strange side-effect caused by something else?

##### Share on other sites
I'd have a neat screenshot to offer if the problem gets solved!

Sorry for double posting all the time, but I don't have ideas anymore, to solve my issue and this is the only place I know, where I can anticipate help.

##### Share on other sites

What I still don't get: why can't I just declare the arrays within the function? As they are only used by this function, I don't see any reason for them to be global and static.
Is there any reasonable explanation or might this be only a strange side-effect caused by something else?

What's the actual error that you get? Is it a compiler error?

##### Share on other sites

What's the actual error that you get? Is it a compiler error?

Yeah, if I declare the arrays global and static it works - with the mentioned drawbacks.
If I declare the arrays within the function using the static keyword, the program has the same problems but only draws a blank screen. i.e. the result of the function is probably always zero.
If I don't use the static keyword within the function the program throws an error at startup. Same thing happens if I try to declare it globally and non static.

It's really frustrating.. all I need is a small temporal storage place, which I can read and write to. The function is admittedly critical and is called up to million times each frame. But obviously the pure allocation of memory and not the computational effort causes the performance to decrease dramatically.

1. 1
2. 2
Rutin
17
3. 3
4. 4
5. 5

• 13
• 26
• 10
• 11
• 9
• ### Forum Statistics

• Total Topics
633735
• Total Posts
3013595
×