On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Paul Mullowney <paulm at txcorp.com> wrote: > I moved all CUSPARSE functions into seqcusparse/aijcusparse.cu (and a > similar mpi version). I was asked to do this some months ago. I did my best. > I think it is significantly improved from before. > > I was also asked by multiple people to attempt to get Complex GPU > capabilities working. I succeeded by making changes to petscmath.h. As Jed > pointed out, some of the changes may have not been C99 compliant. > > There is one commented out function in aijcusparse.cu. That can easily be > fixed. > > Many of the other changes (especially to .cu) files were made to protect > against builds breaking because many of the CUSP preconditioners do not > support complex arithmetic.
You seem to be addressing the specifics of the code; Matt and Jed are talking about the process: patch reviews. > I have asked for input from multiple people on several occasions and not > gotten responses. > > What am I to do if I ask for input/feedback and don't get it????? I saw no request for reviewing this patch series. How did you ask people to review? I recommend (for everyone here) smaller commits. Commit often. There is a great extension for editing changesets (i.e. folding multiple changesets together, splitting changesets apart, etc.) called histedit: http://bitbucket.org/durin42/histedit In fact, just today it was included into mercurial core for the next version. I also recommend the 'record' extension (bundled with mercurial). The next version of mercurial (2.3) promises better bookmark functionality (for feature branches), built-in history editing, and possibly evolution (for shared, mutable changesets). If you have a bitbucket account (free), I would recommend working on your own fork there so that others could review and you could mutate the history based on said reviews.
