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

add interface for replicated partition search #1286

Merged
merged 15 commits into from
Jan 29, 2025

Conversation

hannesbrandt
Copy link
Contributor

Describe your changes here:
Add an interface for the partition search of a forest with replicated coarse mesh.
The interface coincides with the local search in large parts. The parameters is_leaf, leaf_elements and tree_leaf_index are not available in the partition search and are replaced with the process range [pfirst,plast]. Although all global trees are going to be traversed through use of the replicated coarse mesh, the tree id is provided as a t8_locidx_t as this matches the input parameters of t8_cmesh_get_tree_class.

All these boxes must be checked by the reviewers before merging the pull request:

As a reviewer please read through all the code lines and make sure that the code is fully understood, bug free, well-documented and well-structured.

General

  • The reviewer executed the new code features at least once and checked the results manually

  • The code follows the t8code coding guidelines

  • New source/header files are properly added to the Makefiles

  • The code is well documented

  • All function declarations, structs/classes and their members have a proper doxygen documentation

  • All new algorithms and data structures are sufficiently optimal in terms of memory and runtime (If this should be merged, but there is still potential for optimization, create a new issue)

Tests

  • The code is covered in an existing or new test case using Google Test

Github action

  • The code compiles without warning in debugging and release mode, with and without MPI (this should be executed automatically in a github action)

  • All tests pass (in various configurations, this should be executed automatically in a github action)

    If the Pull request introduces code that is not covered by the github action (for example coupling with a new library):

    • Should this use case be added to the github action?
    • If not, does the specific use case compile and all tests pass (check manually)

Scripts and Wiki

  • If a new directory with source-files is added, it must be covered by the script/find_all_source_files.scp to check the indentation of these files.
  • If this PR introduces a new feature, it must be covered in an example/tutorial and a Wiki article.

License

  • The author added a BSD statement to doc/ (or already has one)

@holke
Copy link
Collaborator

holke commented Oct 31, 2024

Thank you for posting the PR.
We will have a look at it and provide feedback.

@Davknapp Davknapp self-assigned this Nov 4, 2024
Copy link
Collaborator

@Davknapp Davknapp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for your Draft PR. it is looking good so far, we will discuss it further!
Can you add an author-file to /doc in the meantime?

src/t8_forest/t8_forest_iterate.h Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/t8_forest/t8_forest_iterate.h Show resolved Hide resolved
src/t8_forest/t8_forest_iterate.cxx Show resolved Hide resolved
src/t8_forest/t8_forest_iterate.h Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/t8_forest/t8_forest_iterate.h Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@Davknapp Davknapp assigned hannesbrandt and unassigned Davknapp Nov 5, 2024
@hannesbrandt
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thank you for the feedback. I have added my author.txt and implemented your suggestions.

@Davknapp
Copy link
Collaborator

Davknapp commented Nov 7, 2024

Thank you for the feedback. I have added my author.txt and implemented your suggestions.

Thank you! We are currently upgrading t8code to support C++17-features and want knew features to support this standart from the beginning on. We discuss what this means in detail for your feature and will keep you updated!

@Davknapp
Copy link
Collaborator

Hey @hannesbrandt

we've worked on a cpp-interface for our current search-algorithms, which you can find in:
#1297

Could you go in a similar direction with your implementation, please?

@hannesbrandt
Copy link
Contributor Author

I've added a cpp-interface for the partition search similar to the interface for the local search. Does this match your idea of what the interface should look like?
I've merged the changes from the not-yet-merged PR #1297 to ensure a consistent file structure.

@Davknapp
Copy link
Collaborator

Davknapp commented Jan 10, 2025

I've added a cpp-interface for the partition search similar to the interface for the local search. Does this match your idea of what the interface should look like? I've merged the changes from the not-yet-merged PR #1297 to ensure a consistent file structure.

Sorry for the late reply and thank you for your changes! We will have a look at it soon. For the future can you assign the reviewer again to the PR as soon as you have finished another round in our review process? That way the reviewer is notified again and your contributions will be added faster. We might have missed this part in our developer guidelines, I have just updated them so we won't let you wait this long again.

@Davknapp Davknapp assigned Davknapp and unassigned hannesbrandt Jan 10, 2025
@Davknapp
Copy link
Collaborator

Hey @hannesbrandt ,

the cpp search interface has just been merged into main. If you update your branch with it we can continue with your work! Thanks!

@hannesbrandt
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hey @Davknapp, I have updated my branch to the most recent main.

@Davknapp Davknapp marked this pull request as ready for review January 28, 2025 16:43
@Davknapp
Copy link
Collaborator

Hey @Davknapp, I have updated my branch to the most recent main.

Perfect, I will have a detailed look at it tomorrow morning!

Copy link
Collaborator

@Davknapp Davknapp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good in general, ´please address my only remaining comment.

@Davknapp Davknapp merged commit 7c7651a into DLR-AMR:main Jan 29, 2025
20 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants