Feature blas

[HenningScheufler]

features

ability to easily evaluate fields on the GPU:

NeoFOAM::scalarField a("a",N);
NeoFOAM::scalarField b("b",N);
NeoFOAM::vectorField c("c",N);

// set init values
NeoFOAM::vectorField  d = c*(a+b)

• [ ] deviceField
  • [x] labelField
  • [x] scalarField
  • [x] vectorField
  • [ ] tensorField
  • [ ] symmtensorField
  • [ ] diagtensorField

    tests

• [ ] deviceField
  • [x] labelField
  • [x] scalarField
  • [x] vectorField
  • [ ] tensorField
  • [ ] symmtensorField
  • [ ] diagtensorField

    benchmarks

• [ ] deviceField
  • [ ] labelField
  • [x] scalarField
  • [ ] vectorField
  • [ ] tensorField
  • [ ] symmtensorField
  • [ ] diagtensorField
• [ ] expressions

[HenningScheufler]

It might be smart to indicate in the name of the field where the field is executed:

NeoFOAM::device_scalarField
NeoFOAM::host_scalarField

[HenningScheufler]

seperation of source and header requires additional libraries for g++ and probably clang++:

https://developer.nvidia.com/blog/separate-compilation-linking-cuda-device-code/

[HenningScheufler]

Feel free to change the installation procedure. My knowledge of cmake is far from perfect

[HenningScheufler]

A requirement for the installation procedure would be that it can be easily consumed by downstream libraries e.g. https://github.com/HenningScheufler/NeoFOAM_GPL. So if kokkos is not installed it should also be installed with neofoam.

For some reason kokkos does not work with fetchcontent maybe I did something wrong.

[greole]

It might be smart to indicate in the name of the field where the field is executed:

NeoFOAM::device_scalarField
NeoFOAM::host_scalarField

Or we go the Ginkgo way by implementing an executor, which would be a parameter to the field constructor.

auto dev_exec =  NeoFOAM::device_executor::create();
auto host_exec =  NeoFOAM::host_executor::create();
NeoFOAM::scalarField a("a",N, dev_exec); // a field on a device
NeoFOAM::scalarField b("b",N, host_exec); // a field on a the host

a+b // we have to decide if this works, if fields are on different executor, in Ginkgo b would be transfered to the device

[bevanwsjones]

It might be smart to indicate in the name of the field where the field is executed:

NeoFOAM::device_scalarField
NeoFOAM::host_scalarField

Or we go the Ginkgo way by implementing an executor, which would be a parameter to the field constructor.

auto dev_exec =  NeoFOAM::device_executor::create();
auto host_exec =  NeoFOAM::host_executor::create();
NeoFOAM::scalarField a("a",N, dev_exec); // a field on a device
NeoFOAM::scalarField b("b",N, host_exec); // a field on a the host

a+b // we have to decide if this works, if fields are on different executor, in Ginkgo b would be transfered to the device

Would it not be possible/good idea then to implement priority into the executor?

auto dev_exec =  NeoFOAM::device_executor::create(1); // priority 1
auto host_exec =  NeoFOAM::host_executor::create(2); // priority 2
NeoFOAM::scalarField a("a",N, dev_exec); 
NeoFOAM::scalarField b("b",N, host_exec); 

a+b // transfers to b 2 > 1.

Although one would need to determine what happens if priorities are equal.

[greole]

Hi and welcome @bevanwsjones, thanks for contributing to NeoFOAM, it is really appreciated.

It might be smart to indicate in the name of the field where the field is executed:

NeoFOAM::device_scalarField
NeoFOAM::host_scalarField

Or we go the Ginkgo way by implementing an executor, which would be a parameter to the field constructor.

auto dev_exec =  NeoFOAM::device_executor::create();
auto host_exec =  NeoFOAM::host_executor::create();
NeoFOAM::scalarField a("a",N, dev_exec); // a field on a device
NeoFOAM::scalarField b("b",N, host_exec); // a field on a the host

a+b // we have to decide if this works, if fields are on different executor, in Ginkgo b would be transfered to the device

Would it not be possible/good idea then to implement priority into the executor?

auto dev_exec =  NeoFOAM::device_executor::create(1); // priority 1
auto host_exec =  NeoFOAM::host_executor::create(2); // priority 2
NeoFOAM::scalarField a("a",N, dev_exec); 
NeoFOAM::scalarField b("b",N, host_exec); 

a+b // transfers to b 2 > 1.

Although one would need to determine what happens if priorities are equal.

While an interesting idea, I fear this would add a lot of complexity. In complex code we could end up with a lot of transfers between host and device. I think for a start we should fail if a + b are on different executors.