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

[feature] cuSolver potrf() and potri() interfaces #780

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
May 5, 2023

Conversation

toxa81
Copy link
Collaborator

@toxa81 toxa81 commented Nov 10, 2022

Warning! This requires cuda>=11.4

TODO:

  • add cuda-11.4 container for the ci/cd runs on Daint

Warning! This requires cuda>=11.4
@toxa81
Copy link
Collaborator Author

toxa81 commented Nov 10, 2022

@simonpintarelli @mtaillefumier Question: do you thinkg cuda>=11.4 dependency is a difficult requirement?

@mtaillefumier
Copy link
Collaborator

I do not think so. 11.4 is quite reasonable as a munimum required. It covers Kepler .. A100 .. grace hopper.

@simonpintarelli
Copy link
Collaborator

simonpintarelli commented Nov 10, 2022

This should be fine. CUDA toolkit 11.x requires driver version >=450.80.2 (https://docs.nvidia.com/deploy/cuda-compatibility/index.html#minor-version-compatibility), on daint the driver is 470.57. I'll add a version constraint on cuda in the spack package after this is merged.

@toxa81
Copy link
Collaborator Author

toxa81 commented Apr 24, 2023

@mtaillefumier @simonpintarelli
again, I'm doing something wrong. I rebased the branch on my local workstation, pushed the changes and now it looks like a big sum of many commits. In reality there are only three files changed.

@toxa81
Copy link
Collaborator Author

toxa81 commented Apr 24, 2023

image

That should be it: a few changes on top of previous commits. All right there.

@simonpintarelli
Copy link
Collaborator

image

That should be it: a few changes on top of previous commits. All right there.

Let me cherry pick these commits.

@toxa81
Copy link
Collaborator Author

toxa81 commented Apr 24, 2023

@simonpintarelli
Copy link
Collaborator

I think git push --force should do the correct job. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/43567577/what-is-the-difference-between-force-push-and-normal-push-in-git

Agree, but I can't see the "force-pushed" tag in the PR history. Perhaps it's just too many commits to spot it.

@simonpintarelli simonpintarelli force-pushed the feature/cusolver-potrf-potri-interface branch from d871c50 to d2317c0 Compare April 24, 2023 19:08
@toxa81
Copy link
Collaborator Author

toxa81 commented Apr 24, 2023

I think my mistake is not using git push --force, that is the source of history confusion

@simonpintarelli
Copy link
Collaborator

I might have been too quick, what was in the rebase commit? I forgot to pull apparently before I did the rebase.

@toxa81
Copy link
Collaborator Author

toxa81 commented Apr 24, 2023

I rebased to latest develop 2f32150

@toxa81 toxa81 self-assigned this Apr 24, 2023
@toxa81 toxa81 added the feature label Apr 24, 2023
@toxa81
Copy link
Collaborator Author

toxa81 commented Apr 24, 2023

Summary of PR:
added (but not yet used) the potrf() and potri() functions form cuSolver library.

@toxa81
Copy link
Collaborator Author

toxa81 commented May 4, 2023

@simonpintarelli is it good to be merged?

Copy link
Collaborator

@simonpintarelli simonpintarelli left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm

@toxa81 toxa81 merged commit fb10dff into develop May 5, 2023
@toxa81 toxa81 deleted the feature/cusolver-potrf-potri-interface branch May 5, 2023 07:48
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants