It's possible you might not need direct access to wave/subgroup ops to implement efficient stream compaction. There's a great old Nvidia blog post on "warp-aggregated atomics"
where they show that their compiler is sometimes able to automatically convert global atomic operations into the warp local versions, and achieve the same performance as manually written intrinsics.
I was recently curious if 10 years later these same optimizations had made it into other GPUs and platforms besides cuda, so I put together a simple atomics benchmark in WebGPU.
The results seem to indicate that these optimizations are accessible through webgpu on chrome on both MacOS and Linux (with nvidia gpu).
Note that I'm not directly testing stream compaction, just incrementing a single global atomic counter. So that would need to be tested to know for sure if the optimization still holds there.
If you see any issues with the benchmark or this reasoning please let me know! I am hoping to solidify my knowledge in this area :)
https://developer.nvidia.com/blog/cuda-pro-tip-optimized-fil...
where they show that their compiler is sometimes able to automatically convert global atomic operations into the warp local versions, and achieve the same performance as manually written intrinsics. I was recently curious if 10 years later these same optimizations had made it into other GPUs and platforms besides cuda, so I put together a simple atomics benchmark in WebGPU.
https://github.com/PWhiddy/webgpu-atomics-benchmark
The results seem to indicate that these optimizations are accessible through webgpu on chrome on both MacOS and Linux (with nvidia gpu). Note that I'm not directly testing stream compaction, just incrementing a single global atomic counter. So that would need to be tested to know for sure if the optimization still holds there. If you see any issues with the benchmark or this reasoning please let me know! I am hoping to solidify my knowledge in this area :)