The UnitTestArrayHandlePermutation test was failing when compiled with
icc. I believe the issue is that the icc optimization takes some
liberties when computing literal floating point values versus computing
them at run time that makes the two slightly different. I changed all
the applicable comparisons in this test from using the == operator to
using the test_equal function, which adds a tolerance to the comparison.
I expect this to fix the test failure.
There are often instances where one wants to make an assert check in a
method that can run in either the control or execution environment. This
is rather difficult in general for the execution environment, but with
this change you can place the VTKM_ASSERT_CONT macro in such a method,
and it should compile even under CUDA. It works by removing the macro if
compiling for a CUDA device.
By default visual studio limits the number of sections in an object file
to 2^16 which isn't enough when creating some of our tests. So we enable
/bigobj which increases that number to 2^32.
Previously, DispatcherBase had an ivar to determine whether to use the
numInstances passed on the stack or to use a 3D range held in a
different ivar. This change allows either a 1D range or 3D range to be
passed on the stack, which I expect to be closer to how we we handle
this when 3D ranges are fully supported.
This also fixes a bug introduced with commit
fdac208acbfa47b613d899a36cefc32a01e8f0a8 where the Use3DSchedule ivar
was not set correctly in UnitTestDispatcherBase.
Per a discussion with Robert Maynard, we no longer have plans to bind
textures or use texture objects. Instead, we are now using the __ldg
command to load from global memory inside the execution portal, which
gives us most of the benefits of textures, but doesn't incur any
bookkeeping.
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.
This API change effects both ArrayTransfer and ArrayManagerExecution.
This is in preparation for a future change to make the API more
consistent with ArrayHandle.
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.
Also found a problem with ArrayHandle that manifests itself with derived
types when you first do a PrepareForInput and then a PrepareForInPlace.
The ArrayHandle assumes the data is already moved to the device and
skips the in place call to the array transfer. However, this means the
transfer of the derived array handle does not have a chance to set up
for in place.
I think the appropriate solution may be to move the appropriate logic
from ArrayHandle to ArrayTransfer. I will look into that next.
The number of values in the array handle portal was screwy and the
GetNumberOfValues method was flat out wrong (thanks to Rob Maynard for
pointing that out). This is fixed.
Also fixed a subtle but nasty typing problem in the Storage's
GetPortalConst method.
Our approach of using the underlying allocator inside thrust was a bad approach,
for some reason it fails to properly allocate uint8's or int8's on the correct
boundaries. I expect that this logic is somewhere else in the code and
instead we should use thrust::system::cuda::vector which does this properly.
When a new file is added to VTK-m, the copyright statement should go at
the top of the file. The copyright contains a date. What should that date
be? I usually set the date to the current year so older files will have
an older copyright whereas newer files will have a newer one. The check
copyright script needs to be flexible on the date.
There was an error in the script that was copied over from Dax. It was
checking for the year 2011, the start of the Dax project, and replacing
that in the text. VTK-m started in 2014, so the script really needs to
check for that year instead.
