-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 228
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
api: Add support for subdomain allocation for Functions #1924
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
e287331
to
58cff8a
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks a lot for this! I've added it to my backlog of "PRs to be reviewed".
At first glance, it looks good to me. Basically, you're lifting some functionality because you need the distributor machinery to be available in the SubDomains (or MultiSubDomains), right?
so yeah I think this is going in the right direction, my other suggestion is to keep PRs as small as possible so that we also merge them as quickly as possible :) |
Oh, do you mean in number of lines written, the number of commits, or number of modified files?
No problem, thanks for the early review, but I still have to fix it for TimeFunction as well.
Yes that is correct, no big changes, just moving things around. I wonder if it would be more appropriate to split the CartesianDiscretization in two classes, one for the distributor machinery and other for the rest. Lemme know what you think. |
Mhh, what do you have in mind? Something like a top abstract class (CartesianDiscretization) and a mixin for "all the CartesianDiscretization that can 1) be used to define a (Time)Function and 2) be decomposed (with MPI) ? |
yeahh, something like that, I'm not sure how methods could be exactly split but something of the sort. |
6d82c9a
to
34311f1
Compare
Hi @AtilaSaraiva , any news from this front? |
Hello Fabio! I'm studying the code for the time being, but you did say you would backport some one dimensional array functionality so I kinda need that to progress further. Either way, I gonna need some more in depth understanding code generation and allocation to change the iteration space so Im digging the code for now. |
ah, yes sure, in my backlog... it will take a while to get there, but we will!
Sure, that makes a lot of sense to me. Get in touch on slack if you have any questions (feel free to use the #development channel) |
58cff8a
to
34311f1
Compare
what's the state of this? |
Still studying how to do it, unfortunately.
…On Wed, Mar 8, 2023, 03:01 Fabio Luporini ***@***.***> wrote:
what's the state of this?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1924 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AHBHMNM5RFPIM42HXBWMNA3W3BKI5ANCNFSM5WUGRW3A>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Hello folks,
This is the first commit for a series of commits adding support for functions to be allocated within a subdomain (let's call those subfunctions for brevity), and operated along other normal functions . This only first commit only adds allocation support for the Function class, I still need to add it for the TimeFunction class, not to mention that I still have to add support for it for the Operator class.
This is only but the first step in the right direction, or so I hope.
Cheers!
Authored by Átila Saraiva Quintela Soares ([email protected])
SENAI CIMATEC geophysicist researcher.