> El 28 feb 2016, a las 10:45, Karl Rupp <[email protected]> escribió: > > Hi, > >> I like the idea of having separate VECCUDA and VECVIENNACL, because it is >> possible to implement VECCUDA without dependence on a C++ compiler (only the >> CUDA compiler). > > I don't understand this part. NVCC also requires a C++ host compiler and is > fairly picky about the supported compilers.
You are right. I was thinking of the case when one has a pure C code and wants to use a --with-language=C PETSc configuration. > > >> If you want, we can prepare a rough initial implementation of VECCUDA in the >> next days, and we can later discuss what to keep/discard. > > Any contributions are welcome :-) > > >> Karl: regarding the time constraints, our idea is to present something at a >> conference this summer, and deadlines are approaching. > > Ok, this is on fairly short notice considering the changes required. I > recommend to start with copying the CUSP sources and migrate it over to > VECCUDA by replacing any use of cusp::array1d to a raw CUDA handle. > Operations from CUSP should be replaced by CUBLAS calls. Ok. Will start work on this. Jose > > Best regards, > Karli >
