Veselin Dobrev
Veselin Dobrev
> There are a lot of these build warnings: > `warning: overloaded virtual function "mfem::Coefficient::Eval" is only partially overridden...` Is this with `nvcc`? Travis now should fail if there are...
cc: @camierjs, @YohannDudouit, @tzanio
Hi @liuzg-23, Sorry for the late reply. I suspect a 32-bit integer overflow may be the issue. Is MUMPS build with 32-bit or 64-bit integers? I'm not sure if there...
For completeness, I'll just add that both > 1. Map the point to the reference element > 2. Evaluate the basis function at the mapped reference coordinates can be easily...
Please resolve conflicts and failed checks.
@tuckerbabcock, I assume this is ready for review, so I'll add the `ready-for-review` label to start the review process.
On LLNL's Lassen this happens automatically. On Perlmuter, it seems, you need to do it explicitly, see here: https://docs.nersc.gov/performance/readiness/#running-applications.
> What makes the small difference here? Is that related to where the matrix is assembled (host vs device)? Yes, the difference is from the assembled matrix and, yes, `LEGACY`...
The way MFEM is compiled when CUDA and MPI are enabled is that we tell `nvcc` (defined by `CUDA_CXX`) to call the MPI compiler (defined by `MPICXX`) for host compilation...
This PR is now [under review](https://github.com/mfem/mfem/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#pull-requests) (see the table in the PR description). To help with the review process, please **do not force push** to the branch.