We know in Compile, there is an Option RuntimeAttributes -> {Listable} which can let the compiled function easily explore the power of thread parallelization.

So is it possible for a LibraryLink function to be Listable like Compile?

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It is possible to parallelize the library function yourself by using frameworks like OpenMP. Other than that, I'm very pessimistic that you can persuade a library function easily to act like a listable compiled function. $\endgroup$ – halirutan Jan 19 '16 at 6:29
  • $\begingroup$ @halirutan Hi,halirutan. I didn't mean that way. Because I only write inner loop function, and let mma to handle the loop part, I think this is more flexible. I currently found my specific librarylink function which returns a list can not get boost from ParallelTable( this is strange, I am still trying to figure out what is wrong). $\endgroup$ – matheorem Jan 19 '16 at 6:37
  • $\begingroup$ @halirutan But why Listable is not possible? After all, Compile to target C we also get a librarylink function. $\endgroup$ – matheorem Jan 19 '16 at 6:37
  • $\begingroup$ I know you didn't mean it that way, but that's the most straight-forward way to get similar behavior. AFAIK, functions that are compiled with parallelization and Listable are not different from others. The parallelization happens in a layer before the actual underlying compiled function. This all is hidden from the user and I'm not sure you can access it to at least see how they did it and when exactly it happens. $\endgroup$ – halirutan Jan 19 '16 at 6:50
  • $\begingroup$ @halirutan OK, I understand. Maybe they can provide an option in the future. $\endgroup$ – matheorem Jan 19 '16 at 6:55

Simple solution

There is an easier solution than the one I gave almost 2 years ago. In principle, you wrap your library function inside another CompiledFunction that is listable. Let the code speak:

fun = LibraryFunctionLoad["demo", "demo_I_I", {Integer}, Integer];
With[{fc = fun}, 
  funListable = Compile[{{i, _Integer, 0}}, fc[i],
    RuntimeAttributes -> {Listable},
    Parallelization -> True]

If you inspect the compiled function, you see there is no external call. Instead, you find a special instruction that calls the library function code:


The performance is exceptionally good even though we have this wrapping. It might be not the best idea to profile such a simple function, but let's do it anyway. For comparison, I'm creating the same function as directly compiled code

inc = Compile[{{i, _Integer, 0}},
  i + 1,
  RuntimeAttributes -> {Listable},
  Parallelization -> True,
  (* CompilationTarget -> "C" *)

You should leave out the CompilationTarget as it was in my tests slower than the one that runs on the virtual machine:

r = Range[10^7];
funListable[r]; // AbsoluteTiming
inc[r]; // AbsoluteTiming
funListable[r] === inc[r]

For the parallelized library function, I get a runtime of 0.42 seconds, while the compiled version needs 0.53 seconds (about 0.7 seconds with compilation target "C"). If you want to see this paradigm outperform other solutions, you should read this answer of mine where I used it to parallelize a highly complex and non-trivial c-code that came from a library.

Old Answer

It seems it is possible. At least I got a toy-example that works. Without having any specific information about this topic from WRI, I always suspected that LibraryLink was not mainly created to give users a way to attach shared library functions to the kernel. I believe that the underlying technology was first used in Compile to make CompilationTarget->"C" possible and afterwards, a part of the framework was exposed to the user to make it possible to use LibraryLink. If someone has more information about this, please feel free to add it here.

That being said, when you look at the InputForm of a simple compiled function, you will find that it contains a LibraryFunction in the exact same way you would get it when loading your own library functions with LibraryFunctionLoad:

fc = Compile[{{x, _Integer, 0}},
  Parallelization -> True,
  RuntimeAttributes -> {Listable},
  CompilationTarget -> "C"

CompiledFunction[{10, 10.3, 5852}, {_Integer}, 
  {{2, 0, 0}, {2, 0, 0}}, {}, {0, 1, 0, 0, 0}, {{1}}, 
  Function[{x}, x, Listable], Evaluate, 
    "compiledFunction0", {{Integer, 0, "Constant"}}, Integer

Some tests with Compile seemed to indicate, that the code that is created is not different with or without using the Listable attribute. This makes me believe that the distribution of arguments for a parallel evaluation of fc happens before the actual LibraryFunction is called. Therefore, when fc is called with a tensor, there might be some wrapper C function that calls the underlying LibraryFunction on all elements of the tensor in parallel.

My idea was that it might be possible to replace the LibraryFunction inside this CompiledFunction when the type of the function is correct. In the above example fc gets a single integer and returns a single integer. Let us use a LibraryLink example of the same type:

libFun = LibraryFunctionLoad["demo",   "demo_I_I", 
  {{Integer, 0, "Constant"}}, Integer]

Note that this function does something different than fc because it increments its argument by one. Additionally, we can ensure that it is not Listable:

Library function call

Looking at InputForm[libFun] reveals that it has the exact same type as the LibraryFunction inside fc except that does something completely differently and was created by us, not by Compile. Let us inject our libFun inside the existing CompiledFunction

fcLibFunc = fc /. _LibraryFunction -> libFun;

(* 11 *)

Now the big question is, is fcLibFunc working on lists doing the work in parallel?

fcLibFunc[{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9}]
(* {2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10} *)

That seems to work. Creating a bigger example shows that the function runs parallel. Let us time this simple toy function against a compiled function that does the same:

fc2 = Compile[{{x, _Integer, 0}},
   x + 1,
   Parallelization -> True,
   RuntimeAttributes -> {Listable},
   CompilationTarget -> "C"

r = Range[10^6];

Do[fc2[r], {100}] // AbsoluteTiming
(* {3.97018, Null} *)

Do[fcLibFunc[r], {100}] // AbsoluteTiming
(* {3.13338, Null} *)

I have measured it several times and it seems our fcLibFunc needs on my machine only 80% of the runtime of fc2. I do not know why this is and whether it can be generalized, but we could show that it is possible to make a library function parallel-Listable.

Let me end by making clear the steps to do this yourself:

  • Create a fake compiled function like above that has the exact same type that your library function has. Please note that you cannot use library functions that change their input arguments. Therefore, you should always use "Constant" passing.

  • Load your library function and replace the last argument inside CompiledFunction with it. This ensures that your library function is called instead of the code that was created by Compile.

  • Think carefully about that when you call this new function with the wrong arguments, the highlevel fake code is used! To give an example, try to evaluate fcLibFunc[I].

| improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ You are genius, halirutan ! +10 : ) $\endgroup$ – matheorem Jan 20 '16 at 2:24
  • $\begingroup$ I think this approach is general. since I have successfully turn one of my librarylink function with 9 real input and a real list return into a Listable one. It works perfectly, use all available cpu threads and the transformation is so easy! I would like to call this method, a Mathematica style "openMP". Though this is a simplified version of openMP, with lesser user control, but it is really easy to implement without considering factors such as share and private, data racing issue..etc $\endgroup$ – matheorem Jan 20 '16 at 2:29
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Just for fun, try to use the option Evaluated -> False in DensityPlot and if this doesn't work, try to wrap your compiled function wey01 like this: test[args__?NumericQ]:=wey01[args] and then plot test. $\endgroup$ – halirutan Jan 20 '16 at 5:14
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Evaluated->False is undocumented??!! $\endgroup$ – matheorem Jan 20 '16 at 5:23
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Hi, halirutan. I just found that just compile the librarylink function again also works. eg: fclib2 = Compile[{{x, _Integer, 0}}, libFun[x], Parallelization -> True, RuntimeAttributes -> {Listable}, CompilationTarget -> "C", CompilationOptions -> {"InlineExternalDefinitions" -> True}] $\endgroup$ – matheorem Feb 6 '16 at 12:24

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.