Currently the ell pack format only does matrix vector products which limits 
its usefulness with real preconditioning, or requires two copies of the matrix.

> On Jul 24, 2017, at 2:42 PM, Richard Tran Mills <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Barry,
> 
> I agree that perhaps we don't need to try to get this in the release, but I 
> think that what this is targeting (processors with wide enough SIMD lanes for 
> this to matter) are becoming more common, and that therefore this is becoming 
> less special purpose. The recently released ("Skylake") Intel Xeon server 
> chips have introduced 512 bit vector instructions ("AVX512"), so I consider 
> this to have gone mainstream at this point -- it's no longer restricted to 
> the relatively small market that Intel's Knights Landing chips were 
> targeting. (Also, it will likely be supported by Intel basically forever -- 
> they *never* remove support for instructions that have been introduced for 
> their mainstream CPUs.) I also think it likely that other CPU manufacturers 
> will follow suit.
> 
> I don't think we need to delay a release to get the ELL format in, but I do 
> think that we should get this merged into master sooner rather than later. I 
> think having things like this in the main line of PETSc development is 1) 
> actually useful to some people trying to do computing on cutting-edge CPUs 
> and 2) helps dispel the myth that "PETSc doesn't care about novel 
> architectures" that I sometimes see propagated (by people pointing to things 
> like our rejection of threading within PETSc as "evidence").
> 
> --Richard
> 
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Smith, Barry F. <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>    The ell pack stuff is kind of special purpose I don't think it needs be in 
> the release. Anyone who needs it for experimentation can just get the branch.
> 
>    Barry
> 
> > On Jul 24, 2017, at 12:07 PM, Zhang, Hong <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > I will create a pull request today. Presumably the review process would 
> > take long for this monster, so it is fine if it cannot go in the release.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Hong (Mr.)
> >
> >> On Jul 24, 2017, at 11:23 AM, Richard Tran Mills <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 3:08 PM, Smith, Barry F. <[email protected]> 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>    Anything stopping us from making a PETSc release?
> >>
> >>    Barry
> >>
> >>
> >> I'd really like to get my rmills/add-aijmkl branch in a form that can go 
> >> in. Should be able to have this ready for everyone's review in a day or 
> >> two (have a deadline for camera-ready copy for a conference paper today, 
> >> so maybe not today).
> >>
> >> Not my branch, but I am wondering what Hong thinks his 
> >> hongzh/add-ell-format branch needs to be ready to go in, and if he could 
> >> use some help from me or anyone else on it. One thing I notice is that it 
> >> looks like some of the Intel intrinsics stuff in there needs some 
> >> additional configure tests to establish that that the correct AVX512 
> >> instructions are supported. I'd like to add an option to use the same sort 
> >> or row permutation used in AIJPERM to eliminate the need for most explicit 
> >> storage or zero elements.
> >>
> >> --Richard
> >
> 
> 

Reply via email to