Skip to content
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

compiler: Block reductions irrespective of par-tile #2309

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 12, 2024

Conversation

FabioLuporini
Copy link
Contributor

@FabioLuporini FabioLuporini commented Feb 12, 2024

Test is in PRO

I also took the chance to create opt-options to allow specifying different par-tiles for reduction loops

@FabioLuporini FabioLuporini added the bug-C bug in the generated code label Feb 12, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 12, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: 12 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (8c86bc2) 86.71% compared to head (6df00ae) 86.69%.

Files Patch % Lines
devito/passes/clusters/blocking.py 40.00% 9 Missing and 3 partials ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2309      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   86.71%   86.69%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         229      229              
  Lines       42958    42978      +20     
  Branches     7958     7966       +8     
==========================================
+ Hits        37251    37259       +8     
- Misses       5023     5032       +9     
- Partials      684      687       +3     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Contributor

@mloubout mloubout left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Small comment, gtg

# See also issue #276:PRO
if any(c.properties.is_parallel_atomic(d) for c in clusters):
if any(c.is_sparse for c in clusters):
if not x:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Don't think you don't need this, it's just a tuple not a multi-tuple, same below

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Wait no you do need it to go back to first element if there is multiple sparse/reduce cluster nevermind

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

correct

@FabioLuporini FabioLuporini merged commit a3ea3c1 into master Feb 12, 2024
31 checks passed
@FabioLuporini FabioLuporini deleted the patch-compr-partile branch February 12, 2024 17:12
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug-C bug in the generated code
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants