Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Libcu++: Nvidia C++ Standard Library

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 139 posts

Re: Libcu++: Nvidia C++ Standard Library

#61

Post by gj_78 »

dahart wrote: post #50
gj_78 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMHO, the question is not that we need code to run on CPUs and GPUs , we do need that, The question is whether the GPU seller has to control both sides. Until I buy a CPU from nvidia I want to keep some kind of independence. When will we be able to use a future riscv-64 CPU with an nvidia GPU ? we will let the answer to nvidia ?

You can use this library to write code that runs on both risc-v and a GPU! You seem to be pretty confused about what this library is. It’s not exerting any control. It’s open source! It’s strictly optional, and it only allows developers to do something they actually want, to write code that will compile for any type of processor that a modern c++ compiler can target.

Again, I see what you mean. I am even against nvidia advising the developers to use such or such C++ library (be it GNU). It is not their role to do that. We need smarter and more shining GPUs from nvidia, not software.

I would say .... The hardware must be sold independently of the software ... but it is a bit too complex, I know.

Re: Libcu++: Nvidia C++ Standard Library

#62

Post by gj_78 »

dahart wrote: post #44
gj_78 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of hardware has builtin software, either inside a firmware or as a driver. Keeping the software part in firmware lets customer free to use any kind of OS. Using host cpu and memory is bad design IMHO.

Can you elaborate on what you mean? This is an open source library for developers to write code that can compile without changes on both CPU and GPU. This solves a problem that can’t be solved in firmware, and this is not a case of nvidia using cpu and host memory - whether to use cpu and host memory is strictly up to the developer.

Sorry, related to cpu and host memory , I was wrong. I meant : having the GPU seller control/write code that plays with host cpu and memory is bad. Let people use their own gcc/g++ or whatever compiler and publish the specs. Unless they also start selling CPUs.

Re: Libcu++: Nvidia C++ Standard Library

#63

Post by rkeene2 »

XorNot wrote: post #40
formerly_proven wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a "you're holding it wrong" problem, though. Projects like GTK or Qt never claimed they'd be backwards-compatible 26 years (Qt has specific backwards-compatibility API and ABI guarantees and are in my experience pretty diligent about it), so if you want a binary to work for a long time, you have to ship your own versions of these. Libraries like Xlib on the other hand are very stable and much more similar to t…

This is one of those things it feels like all the content addressable initiatives should be able to solve somehow. With near ubiquitous internet access, why can't a program ship with a list of standard library hashes it'll link against and my distro go fetch them from IPFS or whatever if they're not local.

This is what AppFS does, as well as CernVM-FS, though AppFS has more features

Re: Libcu++: Nvidia C++ Standard Library

#64

Post by Const-me »

gj_78 wrote: post #24

I really do not understand why a (very good) hardware provider is willing to create/direct/hint custom software for the users. Isn't this exactly what a GPU firmware is expected to do ? Why do they need to run software in the same memory space as my mail reader ?

> Isn't this exactly what a GPU firmware is expected to do?

The source data needs to appear on the GPU somehow. Similarly, the results computed on GPU are often needed for CPU-running code.

GPUs don’t run an OS and are limited. They can’t possibly access file system, and many useful algorithms (like PNG image codec) is a poor fit for them. Technically I think they can access source data directly from system memory, but doing that is inefficient in practice, because GPUs have a special piece of hardware (called copy command queue in d3d12, or transfer queue in Vulcan) to move large blocks of data over PCIe.

That library implements an easier way to integrate CPU and GPU pieces of the program.

Re: Libcu++: Nvidia C++ Standard Library

#65

Post by quotemstr »

fanf2 wrote: post #14

“ Whenever a new major CUDA Compute Capability is released, the ABI is broken. A new NVIDIA C++ Standard Library ABI version is introduced and becomes the default and support for all older ABI versions is dropped. ” https://github.com/NVIDIA/libcudacxx/blob/main/docs/releases...

There should be no expectation of C++ ABI compatibility. Do you want your system to be ABI compatible or do you want it to evolve? You can't have both. You have to pick one. I favor evolution.

Re: Libcu++: Nvidia C++ Standard Library

#66

Post by nonbirithm »

NullPrefix wrote: post #12
BoppreH wrote: post #10

Unfortunate name, "cu" it's the most well known slang for "anus" in Brazil (population: 200+ million). "Libcu++" is sure to cause snickering.

This only affects developers. Limited scope. Wasn't there something related about Microsoft Lumia phones?

Or how Siri means "buttocks" in Japanese?

Re: Libcu++: Nvidia C++ Standard Library

#67

Post by CyberDildonics »

BoppreH wrote: post #10

Unfortunate name, "cu" it's the most well known slang for "anus" in Brazil (population: 200+ million). "Libcu++" is sure to cause snickering.

Wait until you see the namespace the standard library is under.

Although maybe short words that are slang in languages different from what something was written in aren't a big deal.

Re: Libcu++: Nvidia C++ Standard Library

#69

Post by dahart »

gj_78 wrote: post #62
dahart wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you elaborate on what you mean? This is an open source library for developers to write code that can compile without changes on both CPU and GPU. This solves a problem that can’t be solved in firmware, and this is not a case of nvidia using cpu and host memory - whether to use cpu and host memory is strictly up to the developer.

Sorry, related to cpu and host memory , I was wrong. I meant : having the GPU seller control/write code that plays with host cpu and memory is bad. Let people use their own gcc/g++ or whatever compiler and publish the specs. Unless they also start selling CPUs.

This is gcc or whatever compiler, it is not nvidia's compiler. This library does not give nvidia any "control" over host operations, it gives developers another tool.

They did publish the specs, it's open source. BTW, Nvidia's acquisition of ARM means that it will be selling CPUs.

P.P.S., the driver runs on the host, so your proposed alternative doesn't address the point you think you're making.

Re: Libcu++: Nvidia C++ Standard Library

#70

Post by dahart »

gj_78 wrote: post #61
dahart wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can use this library to write code that runs on both risc-v and a GPU! You seem to be pretty confused about what this library is. It’s not exerting any control. It’s open source! It’s strictly optional, and it only allows developers to do something they actually want, to write code that will compile for any type of processor that a modern c++ compiler can target.

Again, I see what you mean. I am even against nvidia advising the developers to use such or such C++ library (be it GNU). It is not their role to do that. We need smarter and more shining GPUs from nvidia, not software. I would say .... The hardware must be sold independently of the software ... but it is a bit too complex, I know.

I'm not understanding your point at all. You don't think developers should be able to write C++ code for the GPU?

What do you even mean about 'it is not their role to do that.' and 'hardware must be sold independently of the software'?? Why are you saying this? Software interfaces are critical for all GPUs and all CPUs, just ask AMD & Intel. There is no such thing as CPU or GPU hardware independent of software. Plus, the specific library here is being sold independently of the hardware, it is doing exactly what you say you want, it's separate and doesn't require having any other nvidia hardware or software. (I can't think of any good reasons to use it without having some nvidia hardware, but it is technically independent, as you wish.)

Post reply on HN