Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Bump StartUpDG.jl compat to 1.1+ #2001

Merged
merged 30 commits into from
Sep 4, 2024
Merged

Bump StartUpDG.jl compat to 1.1+ #2001

merged 30 commits into from
Sep 4, 2024

Conversation

jlchan
Copy link
Contributor

@jlchan jlchan commented Jul 3, 2024

Currently, StartUpDG.jl <1.1.0 imports NamedArrayPartition from RecursiveArrayTools.jl. Due to compat bounds put in place because of #1789, this prevents us from using newer versions of StartUpDG.jl.

This PR moves NamedArrayPartition back into StartUpDG.jl and lowers the compat requirement on RecursiveArrayTools.jl, hopefully making it compatible with Trixi.jl again.

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Jul 3, 2024

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 with its PR number.

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.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 3, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 96.32%. Comparing base (a2bf8e9) to head (2e12c12).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2001   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   96.32%   96.32%           
=======================================
  Files         470      470           
  Lines       37447    37447           
=======================================
  Hits        36070    36070           
  Misses       1377     1377           
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 96.32% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

@ranocha
Copy link
Member

ranocha commented Jul 4, 2024

Thanks!

Looks like the CI failure is real:

https://github.com/trixi-framework/Trixi.jl/actions/runs/9780885936/job/27003604009?pr=2001#step:7:1317

  LoadError: "Memory access for Kronecker.KroneckerProduct{Float64, Matrix{Float64}, Matrix{Float64}} not implemented yet."

@jlchan
Copy link
Contributor Author

jlchan commented Jul 4, 2024

Thanks! I should be able to get to this after the holiday (July 4 in the US)

@jlchan jlchan changed the title Bump StartUpDG.jl compat to 1.1.0 Bump StartUpDG.jl compat to 1.1+ Aug 2, 2024
@jlchan jlchan closed this Aug 3, 2024
@jlchan jlchan reopened this Aug 3, 2024
@jlchan jlchan closed this Aug 3, 2024
@jlchan jlchan reopened this Aug 3, 2024
@jlchan jlchan closed this Aug 3, 2024
@jlchan jlchan reopened this Aug 3, 2024
@jlchan
Copy link
Contributor Author

jlchan commented Aug 30, 2024

It turns out there was a bug in Hex elements of SBP approximation type. Running julia> convergence_test(joinpath(EXAMPLES_DIR, "elixir_euler_curved.jl"), 3) on main gives suboptimal convergence rates

Dict{Symbol, Any} with 3 entries:
  :variables => ("rho", "rho_v1", "rho_v2", "rho_v3", "rho_e")
  :l2        => [0.438461, 0.607849, 0.607727, 0.414621, 0.482715]
  :linf      => [0.240406, 0.676716, 0.68089, 0.144242, 0.296871]

Fixing it using (what will be) v1.1.4 of StartUpDG gives

Dict{Symbol, Any} with 3 entries:
  :variables => ("rho", "rho_v1", "rho_v2", "rho_v3", "rho_e")
  :l2        => [3.23863, 3.60149, 3.60946, 3.26518, 3.70695]
  :linf      => [3.30159, 3.5868, 3.5791, 3.39908, 3.75305]

@jlchan jlchan closed this Aug 30, 2024
@jlchan jlchan reopened this Aug 30, 2024
jlchan and others added 5 commits September 3, 2024 09:29
this is weird - Julia is loading SciMLBase v2.50.5 for me locally, which includes a `discType` parameter.

https://github.com/SciML/SciMLBase.jl/blob/12f30308a4f4959dd6bbf97efc1f600621546cf4/src/solutions/ode_solutions.jl#L108C65-L109

However, I don't think any StartUpDG changes should have triggered this, so I'm not sure why these tests are failing now
@jlchan jlchan marked this pull request as draft September 4, 2024 02:13
@jlchan jlchan marked this pull request as ready for review September 4, 2024 06:15
@jlchan jlchan requested review from ranocha and sloede September 4, 2024 06:15
@jlchan
Copy link
Contributor Author

jlchan commented Sep 4, 2024

This should be ready to review now. It took a while to figure out what was breaking CI in StartUpDG.jl, but I found a bug and a broken test in the process.

I think I cleaned up all the remaining spurious changes I made along the way as well now.

Project.toml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@jlchan jlchan requested a review from sloede September 4, 2024 12:12
@sloede sloede merged commit f9c9107 into main Sep 4, 2024
38 checks passed
@sloede sloede deleted the jc/StartUpDG_v1.1.0 branch September 4, 2024 15:10
Project.toml Show resolved Hide resolved
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants