Although convenient, one of the issues of creating data with
MakeTestDataSet is that it is hard to look at the data created. It is
often helpful to be able to bring in the data into something like
ParaView or VisIt to play with it. To enable that, write them all out as
part of UnitTestVTKDataSetWriter.
- Use AtomicInterface to implement device-specific atomic operations.
- Remove DeviceAdapterAtomicArrayImplementations.
- Extend supported atomic types to include unsigned 32/64-bit ints.
- Add a static_assert to check that AtomicArray type is supported.
- Add documentation for AtomicArrayExecutionObject, including a CAS
example.
- Add a `T Get(idx)` method to AtomicArrayExecutionObject that does
an atomic load, and update existing CAS usage to use this instead
of `Add(idx, 0)`.
This allows for developers to do things such as the following
as constexpr's:
```cxx
constexpr vtkm::Id2 dims(16,16);
constexpr vtkm::Float64 dx = vtkm::Float64(4.0 * vtkm::Pi()) / vtkm::Float64(dims[0] - 1);
```
bf96d921d Add extra braces around std::array initializers
9bbf4a5a6 Corrections and expanded testing of implicit functions
Acked-by: Kitware Robot <kwrobot@kitware.com>
Acked-by: Sujin Philip <sujin.philip@kitware.com>
Merge-request: !1776
I kept getting warnings from different compilers about type conversions
because I was making values by adding an index to them. Change how we
create and test values so that these type issues are less likely to come
up.
This appears to be a bug in older clang and gcc compilers where they
gave a warning asking for an extra unnecessary set of braces around the
initializer of std::array. See for example
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=21629https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25137
I don't think newer compilers give this warning, but we still support
some older compilers it happens on, so we live with it.
For demonstration purposes, I added a vector field to one of the data
sets (the cow nose). However, the serialization test was not expecting a
field of that type and therefore had not compiled the case to serialize
that type of field, which caused a failure. Fixed the problem by
instructing the test to also consider the correct type of vector fields.
The `From` and `To` nomenclature for topology mapping has been confusing for
both users and developers, especially at lower levels where the intention of
mapping attributes from one element to another is easily conflated with the
concept of mapping indices (which maps in the exact opposite direction).
These identifiers have been renamed to `VisitTopology` and `IncidentTopology`
to clarify the direction of the mapping. The order in which these template
parameters are specified for `WorkletMapTopology` have also been reversed,
since eventually there may be more than one `IncidentTopology`, and having
`IncidentTopology` at the end will allow us to replace it with a variadic
template parameter pack in the future.
Other implementation details supporting these worklets, include `Fetch` tags,
`Connectivity` classes, and methods on the various `CellSet` classes (such as
`PrepareForInput` have also reversed their template arguments. These will need
to be cautiously updated.
The convenience implementations of `WorkletMapTopology` have been renamed for
clarity as follows:
```
WorkletMapPointToCell --> WorkletVisitCellsWithPoints
WorkletMapCellToPoint --> WorkletVisitPointsWithCells
```
The `ControlSignature` tags have been renamed as follows:
```
FieldInTo --> FieldInVisit
FieldInFrom --> FieldInMap
FromCount --> IncidentElementCount
FromIndices --> IncidentElementIndices
```
The Invoker is a control side object that handles the construction
of the relevant worklet dispatcher. Moving it to control makes it
obvious that it isn't an algorithm itself but a way to launch
worklets.
There was a special case for ArrayHandleMultiplexer where if you gave it
just one type it would treat that as a value type rather than an array
to support and instead provide a default list of types. However, GCC 4.8
is having trouble compiling the code to create the default list, the
semantics are confusing, and the more I think about it the less likely I
think we will need this functionality. So, just getting rid of that.
Previously, `ArrayHandleCast` was considered a read-only array handle.
However, it is trivial to reverse the cast (now that `ArrayHandleTransform`
supports an inverse transform). So now you can write to a cast array
(assuming the underlying array is writable).
One trivial consequence of this change is that you can no longer make a
cast that cannot be reversed. For example, it was possible to cast a simple
scalar to a `Vec` even though it is not possible to convert a `Vec` to a
scalar value. This was of dubious correctness (it is more of a construction
than a cast) and is easy to recreate with `ArrayHandleTransform`.
Several ArrayHandles (actuall Storage implementations) had a fake portal
type that only defined invalid value types and no Get/Set methods. The
idea was to quickly identify when using a read-only array for writing.
However, this was more trouble than it was worth as the compiler just
gives an incomprehensible error and it is hard to track down the actual
value.
Now actually define some type even if it is never used.
461f87dbc Fix issues with PointLocatorUniformGrid not finding all points
e473cb4bb Fix PointLocatorUniformGrid for points on boundary
Acked-by: Kitware Robot <kwrobot@kitware.com>
Acked-by: Li-Ta Lo <ollie@lanl.gov>
Merge-request: !1720
When creating the search structures in PointLocatorUniformGrid, a point
outside the boundary would be given an invalid bin id. These points
could never be found. Generally, this is not a big deal for points
outside of the boundary, but it could be a problem for points on the
boundary. A point on the boundary could be taken as outside the
boundary. Since the boundary is chosen from limits of the points, some
will almost always be on the boundary.
Fix this problem by clamping all points to the nearest valid bin. This
could cause a problem if the user has selected a boundary excluding a
lot of points. All those points could be grouped to the same edge bins,
but that is probably not a great idea anyway.
how did any of this work?
match other CellSet file layouts.
???
compile in CUDA.
unit tests.
also only serial.
make error message accurate
Well, this compiles and works now.
Did it ever?
use CellShapeTagGeneric
UnitTest matches previous changes.
whoops
Fix linking problems.
Need the same interface
as other ThreadIndices.
add filter test
okay, let's try duplicating CellSetStructure.
okay
inching...
change to wedge in CellSetListTag
Means changing these to support it.
switch back to wedge from generic
compiles and runs
remove ExtrudedType
need vtkm_worklet
vtkm_worklet needs to be included
fix segment count for wedge specialization
need to actually save the index
for the other constructor.
specialize on Explicit
clean up warning
angled brackets not quotes.
formatting
The UnitTestCudaArrayHandleFancy was failing because it was
was calling TestValue in a worklet and comparing that to
a value that was generated by calling TestValue on the host.
Because these were called on different architecture, it is
possible that they will not be bit-wise exact. Add a little
bit of tolerance to the check to avoid false failures for
this reason.
bcaf7d9be ScopedRuntimeDeviceTracker have better controls of setting devices.
4212d0c04 RuntimeDeviceInformation now says the AnyTag exists.
fa03dc664 ScopedRuntimeDeviceTracker requires a device to execute on when constructed.
4020f5198 RuntimeDeviceTracker can't be copied and is only accessible via reference.
e9482018e ScopedRuntimeDeviceTracker has the same API as RuntimeDeviceTracker
Acked-by: Kitware Robot <kwrobot@kitware.com>
Acked-by: Kenneth Moreland <kmorel@sandia.gov>
Merge-request: !1676
The ScopedRuntimeDeviceTracker now can force, enable, or disable
devices. Additionally the ScopedRuntimeDeviceTracker and the
RuntimeDeviceTracker handle the DeviceAdapterTagAny robustly
across all methods.
As the RuntimeDeviceTracker is a per thread construct we now make
it explicit that you can only get a reference to the per-thread
version and can't copy it.
The consistent API for control to execution memory transfers is
the ArrayHandle class. Previously the tests would verify memory
transfer by calling the ArrayManagerExecution class directly. This
is problematic as the class isn't used by ArrayHandle<T, StorageBasic>.
ff687016e For VTK-m libs all includes of DeviceAdapterTagCuda happen from cuda files
Acked-by: Kitware Robot <kwrobot@kitware.com>
Acked-by: Kenneth Moreland <kmorel@sandia.gov>
Merge-request: !1648
It is very easy to cause ODR violations with DeviceAdapterTagCuda.
If you include that header from a C++ file and a CUDA file inside
the same program we an ODR violation. The reasons is that the C++
versions will say the tag is invalid, and the CUDA will say the
tag is valid.
The solution to this is that any compilation unit that includes
DeviceAdapterTagCuda from a version of VTK-m that has CUDA enabled
must be invoked by the cuda compiler.
