[Users] Code failure apparently due to changes in Reduction.c

[Roland Haas]

Hello Yosef,

> We were using Carpet and the actual call was to
> 
> CCTK_ReduceLocArrayToArray1D
> 
> Is this valid in Carpet?
No, unfortunately this is not valid in Carpet.

For two reasons actually:

The combination CCTK_LocalArrayReductionHandle and
CCTK_ReduceLocArrayToArray1D is never valid, since CCTK_LocalArrayReductionHandle  is "new" interface, while
CCTK_ReduceLocArrayToArray1D is "old" interface. You can see it among
the list of functions in my previous email.

Further "CCTK_LocalArrayReductionHandle", being "new" interface, is
never valid for Carpet, since Carpet only supports the "old" interface.

So "no", "no".

"CCTK_ReduceLocArrayToArray1D" however is "old" interface, so is valid
with Carpet, but you must use "CCTK_ReductionArrayHandle" to get the
reduction handle for it. You must *not* use "CCCTK_ReductionHandle" or
"CCTK_LocalArrayReductionHandle" to get a handle to use with
"CCTK_ReduceLocArrayToArray1D".

Nope this helps. The functions names a confusing, unfortunately, and the
fact that the "old" interface, which is the only one Carpet supports,
is not fully documented in the CCTK reference anymore, does not really
help.

Yours,
Roland

> 
> On 8/17/21 12:59 PM, Roland Haas wrote:
> > Hello Yosef,
> >
> > there's a couple different reduction interfaces and the handle you get
> > must match.
> >
> > It depends a bit on the drive you are using.
> >
> > Carpet only supports the "old style" reduction interface that uses:
> >
> > CCTK_Reduce
> > CCTK_ReductionHandle
> >
> > CCTK_ReduceLocalScalar
> > CCTK_ReductionArrayHandle
> > and:
> > CCTK_ReduceArray
> > CCTK_ReduceLocalArray1D
> >
> > it does not support the new interface CCTK_LocalArrayReductionHandle at
> > all.
> >
> > PUGH supports the new one and (I think) the old one as well. The new
> > one uses:
> >
> > CTK_LocalArrayReductionHandle
> > CCTK_ReduceLocalArrays
> >
> > See
> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.einsteintoolkit.org/referencemanual/ReferenceManual.html*x1-1000A__;Iw!!DZ3fjg!vO69j0_NDEC1JMkgMyZSdz57Nk1EjyHTBh3FU214vo8W15081AZ6_X93p6b5_AlO$  and search for A488.
> >
> > So are you using this with PUGH or Carpet? With Carpet it must fail (not
> > supported at all), with PUGH it should work as long as you sue the
> > correct set of calls ie CCTK_LocalArrayReductionHandle +
> > CCTK_ReduceLocalArrays (for PUGH only).
> >
> > Yours,
> > Roland
> >  
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >>    A code that we are using seems to no longer work with Cactus. The
> >> issue seems to be that the code called CCTK_LocalArrayReductionHandle.
> >> The code, as checked out, produces errors because the appropriate handle
> >> isn't found. If I modify the function as below,  I no longer get the
> >> error message
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> int CCTK_LocalArrayReductionHandle(const char *reduction)
> >> {
> >>     int handle;
> >>
> >>
> >>     handle = Util_GetHandle(LocalArrayReductionOperators, reduction, NULL);
> >>     if (handle < 0)
> >>     {
> >>       CCTK_VWarn(1,__LINE__,__FILE__,"Cactus",
> >>                  "CCTK_LocalArrayReductionHandle: No handle: '%d' found
> >> for reduction operator "
> >>                  "'%s'", handle, reduction);
> >>     }
> >>
> >>     handle += ARRAY_OPERATOR_HANDLE_OFFSET; //// MY changes
> >>
> >>     return handle;
> >> }
> >>
> >>
> >> Should we no longer use CCTK_LocalArrayReductionHandle?
> >>  
> >
> >  



-- 
My email is as private as my paper mail. I therefore support encrypting
and signing email messages. Get my PGP key from http://pgp.mit.edu .
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.einsteintoolkit.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20210817/853fe640/attachment-0001.bin