One of the dashboards is complaining about the destructor implementation
not being used in a particular test build. I suspect it is because the
export macro has an inline, so I am trying removing it.
These asserts are consolidated into the unified Assert.h. Also made some
minor edits to add asserts where appropriate and a little bit of
reconfiguring as found.
The ArrayHandle classes all exclusively work in the control environment.
However, CUDA likes to add __device__ to constructors, destructors, and
assignment operators it automatically adds. This in turn causes warnings
about the __device__ function using host-only classes (like
boost::shared_ptr). Solve this problem by adding explicit methods for
all of these.
Implemented this by wrapping up all these default objects in a macro.
This also solved the problem of other constructors that are necessary
for array handles such as a constructor that takes the base array
handle.
Under CUDA, the default constructors and destructors created are exported
as __host__ and __device__, which causes problems because they used a boost
pointer that only works on the host. The explicit copy constructors and
destructors do the same thing as the default ones except declared to only
work on the host.
9a8809f9 Add CellSetPermutation which allows custom iteration over a cell set.
66f6db5a IsWriteableArrayHandle now can tell if an array handle can be written too
20f3fb50 Update VertexClustering to use vtkm::cont::CellSetSingleType.
154896b7 Extend the test for DataSetSingleType.
Acked-by: Kitware Robot <kwrobot@kitware.com>
Merge-request: !228
Add new version of DynamicArrayHandle::CastToArrayHandle
This takes a reference to an array handle and fills it. This removes a lot of the pain of determining template arguments.
See merge request !205
ArrayHandles in DAX have a CopyInto function which allows the user to copy an array handle's data into a compatible STL type iterator. Originally this was fairly straight forward to implement since array handles in DAX are templated on the DeviceAdapterTag. In contrast, VTKm array handles use a polymorphic ArrayHandleExecutionManager under the hood allowing a single array handle to interface with multiple devices at runtime. To achieve this virtual functions are used. This makes implementing the CopyInto function difficult since it is templated on the IteratorType and virtual functions cannot be templated.
To work around this, I've implemented a concrete templated CopyInto function in the class derived from ArrayHandleExecutionManagerBase. In the ArrayHandle class, CopyInto dynamically casts the base class into the derived class, then calls the CopyInto function defined in the derived class.
The drawback to this approach is that, should the user define their own class that inherits from ArrayHandleExectionManagerBase, they are not forced to implement the CopyInto function, unlike the other virtual functions.
On one of my compile platforms, GCC was giving conversion warnings from
any boost include that was not wrapped in pragmas to disable conversion
warnings. To make things easier and more robust, I created a pair of
macros, VTKM_BOOST_PRE_INCLUDE and VTKM_BOOST_POST_INCLUDE, that should
be wrapped around any #include of a boost header file.
The Invoke of the topology dispatcher is also changed to expect a
concrete cell set (which the DynamicCellSet is automatically cast to)
rather than a connectivity structure. The dispatcher calls the
GetNodeToCellConnectivity method for you. (That is currently the only
one supported.)
The driving desire for this change was to make vtk-m ArrayHandle behave more
like the standard vector. The canonical example of what we want to support is:
```
std::vector<vtkm::Id> values;
values.resize(100);
vtkm::cont::ArrayHandle<vtkm::Id> array = vtkm::cont::make_ArrayHandle(values);
vtkm::cont::DeviceAdapterAlgorithm<DeviceAdapter>::Sort(array);
```
And with-out the ability to modify user provided memory, this was impossible.
Fix compile warnings that come up with the flags
-Wconversion -Wno-sign-conversion
This catches several instances (mostly in the testing framework) where
types are implicitly converted. I expect these changes to fix some of
the warnings we are seeing in MSVC.
I was going to add these flags to the list of extra warning flags, but
unfortunately the Thrust library has several warnings of these types,
and I don't know a good way to turn on the warnings for our code but
turn them off for Thrust.
Previously ArrayTransfer and ArrayManagerExecution received a reference
to a Storage class in their constructor and held the reference as an
ivar. In retrospect, this is just asking for trouble. First, it is way
too easy to pass by value when you mean to pass by reference. Second, if
there ever is a bug where the Storage goes out of scope before the
classes holding a reference, it is that much harder to debug.
This includes changing methods like LoadDataForInput to PrepareForInput.
It also changed the interface a bit to save a reference to the storage
object. (Maybe it would be better to save a pointer?) These changes also
extend up to the ArrayManagerExecution class, so it can effect device
adapter implementations.
The UserPortal in ArrayHandle was used to copy a pointer the user
created into an ArrayHandle to use in VTK-m algorithms. However, this is
only really valid for a basic storage, so the functionality has been
moved there, and you have to construct an ArrayHandle with a storage
instead of an array portal.
Add an Allocate method in ArrayHandle that basically forwards the
alllocate request to the storage object. This allows some measure of
control of the array from the control side. You can allocate the array
and set values (by getting the control array portal) if you so desire.
Previously when ReleaseResourcesExecution was called, the method blindly
deleted the execution array regardless of whether there was a valid copy
in the control environment. This could potentially lose data. What if
someone wanted to conserve memory on the device by clearing the array of
an output array?
There is also now an internal method that blindly deletes the array.
This is good for internal functions that are doing something to
invalidate the execution data anyway.
Fixed a problem where ArrayHandle would cause a crash if you tried to
get the control portal on an uninitialized array (it was supposed to
throw an exception).
Also changed some methods in ArrayHandle so that they work resonably
without error when used with an uninitialized array. Specifically, the
aforementioned behavior was changed to "allocate" an array of size 0
(that is, call Allocate(0) on the storage object) to return an empty
array portal rather than throw an error. Although this use of
ArrayHandle can be considered erroneous, it is convenient the get an
empty array portal when dealing with a potentially unallocated array
rather than create a special condition.
The Transport class is responsible for moving data from the control
environment to the execution environment. (Actually, it might be more
accurate to say it gets the execution environment associated with a
given control object.) The Transport class is templated with a tag that
controls the mechanism used for the transport.
After a talk with Robert Maynard, we decided to change the name
ArrayContainerControl to Storage. There are several reasons for this
change.
1. The name ArrayContainerControl is unwieldy. It is long, hard for
humans to parse, and makes for long lines and wraparound. It is also
hard to distinguish from other names like ArrayHandleFoo and
ArrayExecutionManager.
2. The word container is getting overloaded. For example, there is a
SimplePolymorphicContainer. Container is being used for an object that
literally acts like a container for data. This class really manages
data.
3. The data does not necessarily have to be on the control side.
Implicit containers store the data nowhere. Derivative containers might
have all the real data on the execution side. It is possible in the
future to have storage on the execution environment instead of the
control (think interfacing with a simulator on the GPU).
Storage is not a perfect word (what does implicit storage really mean?),
but its the best English word we came up with.
We made this change a while ago to help with completion in IDEs.
(Completion was matching a bunch of wrapper macros that were almost
never used anywhere.) Most of the changes are in comments, but there are
a few bad macro definitions.
Use this mechanism in the dynamic array handle to skip over trying
invalid array handle types (and thereby incurring a compiler error even
though we never intended to use these classes).
