Hi Folks, Has anyone had a chance to look at this pull request? I had a bunch of questions about how I should do things when I was working this but figured most of them out by looking at other parts of PETSc, and I feel reasonably confident that the current code is not too terrible. (Famous last words?) I tested on my Mac with clang and gfortran with real/complex and single/double-precision and the tests look fairly clean. Would like to merge this to next soon so that it can be tested further.
Thanks, Richard On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Richard Tran Mills <[email protected]> wrote: > My estimate of "a few days" ended up being off (discovered many problems > when running the test suite with it using SeqAIJMKL as the AIJ subtype), > but I think my initial AIJMKL class is now close to completion and have > submitted a pull request. > > --Richard > > On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Karl Rupp <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi folks, >> >> alright, let me summarize and organize things. If you're on the list, >> please provide or update information on 'what left' and 'expected >> completion': >> >> * SF support for MPIUNI >> - Who: Jed >> - What left: Implementation >> - Expected completion: ? >> >> * Hashtable support for matrix assembly >> - Who: Jed >> - What left: ? >> - Expected completion: ? >> >> * New GLVis based viewer for DMDAs, FEM an FVM >> - Who: Stefano >> - What left: Test & merge >> - Expected completion: in a few days >> >> * Tools for particle-in-cell methods >> - Who: Dave >> - What left: ? >> - Expected completion: ? >> >> * AIJMKL submatrix type >> - Who: Richard >> - What left: Cleanup, test & merge >> - Expected completion: a few days >> >> * Manual chapter: Performance Hints >> - Who: Karli >> - What left: More writing >> - Expected completion: this week >> >> I thought about using the issue tracker for this, but without support >> for proper tagging or milestones the issue tracker on Bitbucket is of >> very limited use. >> >> Best regards, >> Karli >> >> >> On 07/23/2017 05:08 PM, Barry Smith wrote: >> > >> > Anything stopping us from making a PETSc release? >> > >> > Barry >> > >> > >
