Tiled Flash Linear Attention: More Efficient Linear RNN and xLSTM Kernels

Linear RNNs with gating recently demonstrated competitive performance compared to Transformers in language modeling. Although their linear compute scaling in sequence length offers theoretical runtime advantages over Transformers, realizing these benefits in practice requires optimized custom kernels, as Transformers rely on the highly efficient Flash Attention kernels (Dao, 2024). Leveraging the chunkwise-parallel formulation of linear RNNs, Flash Linear Attention (FLA) (Yang & Zhang, 2024) shows that linear RNN kernels are faster than Flash Attention, by parallelizing over chunks of the input sequence. However, since the chunk size of FLA is limited, many intermediate states must be materialized in GPU memory. This leads to low arithmetic intensity and causes high memory consumption and IO cost, especially for long-context pre-training. In this work, we present Tiled Flash Linear Attention (TFLA), a novel kernel algorithm for linear RNNs, that enables arbitrary large chunk sizes and high arithmetic intensity by introducing an additional level of sequence parallelization within each chunk. First, we apply TFLA to the xLSTM with matrix memory, the mLSTM (Beck et al., 2024). Second, we propose an mLSTM variant with sigmoid input gate and reduced computation for even faster kernel runtimes at equal language modeling performance. In our speed benchmarks, we show that our new mLSTM kernels based on TFLA outperform highly optimized Flash Attention, Linear Attention and Mamba kernels, setting a new state of the art for efficient long-context sequence modeling primitives. Our code is available at: https://github.com/NX-AI/mlstm_kernels * Now at Google Deepmind. Justification: We state that our experiments were conducted on NVIDIA H100 GPUs. 9. Code of ethics Question: Does the research conducted in the paper conform, in every respect, with the NeurIPS Code of Ethics https://neurips.cc/public/EthicsGuidelines? Answer: [Yes] Justification: We conform with the code of ethics. 10. Broader impacts Question: Does the paper discuss both potential positive societal impacts and negative societal impacts of the work performed? Answer: [Yes] Justification: We provide an impact statement in the appendix, just before the references. 11. Safeguards Question: Does the paper describe safeguards that have been put in place for responsible release of data or models that have a high risk for misuse (e.g., pretrained language models, image generators, or scraped datasets)? Answer: [NA] Justification: The paper does not pose such risks. 12. Licenses for existing assets Question: Are the creators or original owners of assets (e.g., code, data, models), used in the paper, properly credited and are the license and terms of use explicitly mentioned and properly respected? Answer: [Yes] Justification: All software licenses are respected. 13. New assets Question: Are new assets introduced in the paper well documented and is the documentation provided alongside the assets? Answer: [Yes] Justification: The code that will be released with the paper contains proper documentation. 14. Crowdsourcing and research with human subjects Question: For crowdsourcing experiments and research with human subjects, does the paper include the full text of instructions given to participants and screenshots, if applicable, as well as details about compensation (if any)? Answer: [NA] Justification: The paper does not involve crowdsourcing or research with human subjects 15. Institutional review board (IRB) approvals or equivalent for research with human subjects Question: Does the paper describe potential risks incurred by study participants, whether such risks were disclosed to the subjects, and whether Institutional Review Board (IRB) approvals (or an equivalent approval/review based on the requirements of your country or institution) were obtained? Answer: [NA] Justification: The paper does not involve crowdsourcing nor research with human subjects. 16. Declaration of LLM usage Question: Does the paper describe the usage of LLMs if it is an important, original, or non-standard component of the core methods in this research? Note that if the LLM is used only for writing, editing, or formatting purposes and does not impact the core methodology, scientific rigorousness, or originality of the research, declaration is not required. Answer: [NA] Justification: The core method development in this research does not involve LLMs as any important, original, or non-standard components.