Conversation
Collaborator
|
Thank you!! I'll merge this soon. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Some fixes for threading:
Previously, the chunk boundary was computed as:
Since
thread_idx / num_threadsperformed integer division, this always evaluated to 0 forthread_idx < num_threads.I also removed the
sqrt, since (as far as I can see), where theend_chunk_idxis used, it covers "linear" work, not triangular/quadratically growing work.Additionally, I encountered segfaults on large problem sizes (many determinants), which I eventually tracked down to a heap-use-after-free from
pyci/src/hci.cpp:277.Not entirely sure why this would happen, but maybe the order of threads joining is not guaranteed to correspond to the order of the
v_wfns? The proposed change first joins all threads, then adds the determinants: