Elusive order of async GPU kernels: scheduling, abstractions, DSL implications
The article discusses the complexities of scheduling asynchronous GPU kernels and the various approaches to manage them. It highlights the differences between static, temporal, and spatial scheduling methods based on hardware capabilities. Additionally, it explores the challenges of developing domain-specific languages (DSLs) for kernel writing that align with hardware behavior.
- ▪There are three main approaches to scheduling GPU kernels: static, temporal, and spatial.
- ▪Different hardware architectures influence the choice of scheduling method, with Nvidia GPUs introducing warp specialization.
- ▪Libraries like CUTLASS and ThunderKittens help streamline kernel writing by packaging common patterns and managing synchronization.
Hacker News (Newest) files mainly under programming. We currently carry 5,306 of its stories.
Story provenance
Source · retrieval · rights · ranking — open for full record
inspect →
Story provenance
Attribution is not the same as permission. This drawer separates discovery metadata, excerpts, WeSearch-generated summaries, reuse status, and whether the publisher receives the visit. Nothing here claims a legal grant the publisher has not made.
Record
| Original publisher | Ian’s Blog |
| Canonical URL | https://ianbarber.blog/2026/05/25/the-elusive-order-of-things/ |
| Publication time | Tue, 26 May 2026 04:18:32 +0000 |
| Retrieval time | 2026-05-26T04:37:43.007Z |
| Last seen | 2026-05-26T04:37:43.007Z |
| Headline source | Publisher (no WeSearch rewrite) |
| Excerpt source | publisher body |
| Excerpt method | First ~120 words (~800 chars) of extracted publisher body, fair-use limited. |
| Summary | WeSearch · cerebras-chat (WeSearch summarizer) |
| Summary source text | contentText |
| Citation coverage | Summary is a WeSearch-generated derivative; primary citation is the original publisher URL. |
| Cluster | DqpO3SeLpfva |
| Cluster logic | Grouped by semantic title/content similarity across sources within a rolling window. Same-publisher template collisions are excluded from coverage comparison. |
| Ranking reason | Story pages are not engagement-ranked. Hub feeds use recency, with optional source-diversified chronological ordering (cap consecutive stories per source). No personalized ranking. |
| Publisher visit | Yes — open original |
| Substitutes article? | No — link-out required for full text |
Rights status (four layers)
WeSearch handling by dimension
| Indexing | May the item be indexed (stored, ranked, made findable)? | Allowed |
| Snippet | May a short excerpt of the publisher's text be shown? | Allowed |
| AI summary | May WeSearch generate its own short summary of the article? | Limited |
| Retrieval / RAG | May the content be exposed for third-party retrieval-augmented generation? | Not asserted |
| Model training | May the content be used to train AI models? | Not asserted |
| Commercial reuse | May the content be reused commercially? | Not permitted |
Basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed. Contact: [email protected]. Reviewed: 2026-07-24.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
The elusive order of things Written by Ian in ML Infrastructure, posts SIMT offered a fantastic bargain. You write a straight-line program, the machine runs a lot of copies of it, and when one waits for memory the hardware swaps in others. You look with disdain on the less enlightened thread programmers dealing with deadlocks and concurrency etc. etc. Choosing what to run where and when is a scheduling problem, and there have been three effective approaches to that so far. You can schedule statically: decide ahead of time what all the units should do each tick. You can schedule temporally: swapping in different phases of workers via a pipeline. Or you can schedule spatially: divide the resources of the machine into different roles.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at Ian’s Blog.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from Ian’s Blog
