Review checklist

This checklist is meant to assist creators of PRs (to let them know what reviewers will typically look for) and reviewers (to guide them in a structured review process). Items do not need to be checked explicitly for a PR to be eligible for merging.

Purpose and scope

• The PR has a single goal that is clear from the PR title and/or description.
• All code changes represent a single set of modifications that logically belong together.
• No more than 500 lines of code are changed or there is no obvious way to split the PR into multiple PRs.

Code quality

• The code can be understood easily.
• Newly introduced names for variables etc. are self-descriptive and consistent with existing naming conventions.
• There are no redundancies that can be removed by simple modularization/refactoring.
• There are no leftover debug statements or commented code sections.
• The code adheres to our conventions and style guide, and to the Julia guidelines.

Documentation

• New functions and types are documented with a docstring or top-level comment.
• Relevant publications are referenced in docstrings (see example for formatting).
• Inline comments are used to document longer or unusual code sections.
• Comments describe intent ("why?") and not just functionality ("what?").
• If the PR introduces a significant change or new feature, it is documented in NEWS.md.

Testing

• The PR passes all tests.
• New or modified lines of code are covered by tests.
• New or modified tests run in less then 10 seconds.

Performance

• There are no type instabilities or memory allocations in performance-critical parts.
• If the PR intent is to improve performance, before/after time measurements are posted in the PR.

Verification

• The correctness of the code was verified using appropriate tests.
• If new equations/methods are added, a convergence test has been run and the results
  are posted in the PR.

Created with ❤️ by the Trixi.jl community.

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (c7c4cf7) 94.67% compared to head (0cf4b0e) 96.23%.
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1771      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   94.67%   96.23%   +1.56%     
==========================================
  Files         436      436              
  Lines       35166    35188      +22     
==========================================
+ Hits        33292    33862     +570     
+ Misses       1874     1326     -548     

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

@jlchan Could you please figure out the minimum version of StartUpDG.jl (or other dependencies) required to let tests pass? Currently, only the DGMulti tests fail, see https://github.com/trixi-framework/Trixi.jl/actions/runs/7177988031/job/19545377350?pr=1771#step:8:5324

@jlchan Could you please figure out the minimum version of StartUpDG.jl (or other dependencies) required to let tests pass? Currently, only the DGMulti tests fail, see https://github.com/trixi-framework/Trixi.jl/actions/runs/7177988031/job/19545377350?pr=1771#step:8:5324

Odd, the failures are with OrdinaryDiffEq.jl, StaticArrays.jl, and Static.jl. I'll try to figure out what broke, but it's not immediately clear.

There is also

/home/runner/work/Trixi.jl/Trixi.jl/examples/dgmulti_2d/elixir_euler_fdsbp_periodic.jl
elixir_euler_fdsbp_periodic.jl: Error During Test at /home/runner/work/Trixi.jl/Trixi.jl/test/test_trixi.jl:228
  Got exception outside of a @test
  LoadError: UndefKeywordError: keyword argument `N` not assigned
  Stacktrace:
    [1] StartUpDG.RefElemData(elem::NodesAndModes.Quad, approx_type::SummationByPartsOperators.PeriodicDerivativeOperator{Float64, 2, 2, SummationByPartsOperators.FastMode, SummationByPartsOperators.Fornberg1998, StepRangeLen{Float64, Base.TwicePrecision{Float64}, Base.TwicePrecision{Float64}, Int64}})
      @ StartUpDG ~/.julia/packages/StartUpDG/dgtGs/src/RefElemData.jl:142

@ranocha the issue with StartUpDG.jl is that I added the SummationByPartsOperators.jl extension in 0.17.7, so to get the FDSBP tests to pass, we need 0.17.7.

Hopefully fixed the failures via f134e7a. Lets wait for CI.

It looks like all commits after 8a81714 did not change the test failures

It was working locally - but I didn't test the multi-threaded time integration...

The CI failure seems to be related to LoopVectorization.jl and StrideArrays.jl. Maybe try bumping one of these two (even higher)?

Feel free to go ahead with it. I don't have the bandwidth to do so this week.

I gave it another try (see #1848) and found that JuliaSIMD/StrideArrays.jl#77 was the issue. Thus, bumping StrideArrays to v0.1.26 fixed the problem locally for me.