Skip to content

Conversation

@XZTian64
Copy link
Collaborator

@XZTian64 XZTian64 commented Jun 2, 2025

Description

This branch removes unused dummy variables

Fixes #(issue) [optional]

Type of change

Please delete options that are not relevant.

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Something else

Scope

  • This PR comprises a set of related changes with a common goal

If you cannot check the above box, please split your PR into multiple PRs that each have a common goal.

How Has This Been Tested?

Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes.
Provide instructions so we can reproduce.
Please also list any relevant details for your test configuration

  • Test A
  • Test B

Test Configuration:

  • What computers and compilers did you use to test this:

Checklist

  • I have added comments for the new code
  • I added Doxygen docstrings to the new code
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation (docs/)
  • I have added regression tests to the test suite so that people can verify in the future that the feature is behaving as expected
  • I have added example cases in examples/ that demonstrate my new feature performing as expected.
    They run to completion and demonstrate "interesting physics"
  • I ran ./mfc.sh format before committing my code
  • New and existing tests pass locally with my changes, including with GPU capability enabled (both NVIDIA hardware with NVHPC compilers and AMD hardware with CRAY compilers) and disabled
  • This PR does not introduce any repeated code (it follows the DRY principle)
  • I cannot think of a way to condense this code and reduce any introduced additional line count

If your code changes any code source files (anything in src/simulation)

To make sure the code is performing as expected on GPU devices, I have:

  • Checked that the code compiles using NVHPC compilers
  • Checked that the code compiles using CRAY compilers
  • Ran the code on either V100, A100, or H100 GPUs and ensured the new feature performed as expected (the GPU results match the CPU results)
  • Ran the code on MI200+ GPUs and ensure the new features performed as expected (the GPU results match the CPU results)
  • Enclosed the new feature via nvtx ranges so that they can be identified in profiles
  • Ran a Nsight Systems profile using ./mfc.sh run XXXX --gpu -t simulation --nsys, and have attached the output file (.nsys-rep) and plain text results to this PR
  • Ran a Rocprof Systems profile using ./mfc.sh run XXXX --gpu -t simulation --rsys --hip-trace, and have attached the output file and plain text results to this PR.
  • Ran my code using various numbers of different GPUs (1, 2, and 8, for example) in parallel and made sure that the results scale similarly to what happens if you run without the new code/feature

@XZTian64 XZTian64 requested a review from a team as a code owner June 2, 2025 00:57
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 2, 2025

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 79.51807% with 17 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 42.83%. Comparing base (6abe401) to head (7e3b4e9).
Report is 5 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
src/simulation/m_ibm.fpp 0.00% 3 Missing ⚠️
src/common/m_mpi_common.fpp 0.00% 2 Missing ⚠️
src/common/m_variables_conversion.fpp 81.81% 2 Missing ⚠️
src/pre_process/m_boundary_conditions.fpp 66.66% 2 Missing ⚠️
src/pre_process/m_patches.fpp 50.00% 2 Missing ⚠️
src/common/m_boundary_common.fpp 0.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
src/pre_process/m_model.fpp 66.66% 1 Missing ⚠️
src/simulation/m_bubbles.fpp 0.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
src/simulation/m_cbc.fpp 85.71% 1 Missing ⚠️
src/simulation/m_hyperelastic.fpp 0.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
... and 1 more
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #854      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   43.42%   42.83%   -0.60%     
==========================================
  Files          68       68              
  Lines       19630    19499     -131     
  Branches     2353     2364      +11     
==========================================
- Hits         8525     8352     -173     
- Misses       9676     9724      +48     
+ Partials     1429     1423       -6     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@sbryngelson
Copy link
Member

@XZTian64 this has a bunch of merge commits due to @prathi-wind's PR. they are easy to resolve, though. you just have to use your arguments while keeping @prathi-wind's pure/impure statements.

@sbryngelson sbryngelson merged commit 443c33c into MFlowCode:master Jun 7, 2025
29 checks passed
prathi-wind added a commit to prathi-wind/MFC-prathi that referenced this pull request Jun 12, 2025
Co-authored-by: Xuzheng Tian <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Spencer Bryngelson <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Spencer Bryngelson <[email protected]>
prathi-wind pushed a commit to prathi-wind/MFC-prathi that referenced this pull request Jul 13, 2025
Co-authored-by: Xuzheng Tian <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Spencer Bryngelson <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Spencer Bryngelson <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants