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

Fix setting of Pardiso iparm and dparm parameters #367

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 24, 2023

Conversation

BeatHubmann
Copy link
Contributor

@BeatHubmann BeatHubmann commented Aug 23, 2023

The current implementation does not set the iparm/dparm vectors of tuples correctly, but only writes the last tuple of the respective vectors.

Copy link

@ai-maintainer ai-maintainer bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

AI-Maintainer Review for PR - Fix setting of Pardiso iparm and dparm parameters

Title and Description ⚠️

The title is clear and concise, but the description is missing

The title of the pull request effectively communicates the purpose of the changes, which is to fix the setting of Pardiso iparm and dparm parameters. However, the description is missing. It would be beneficial to have a brief explanation in the description to provide more context and clarify the specific problem that was addressed.

Scope of Changes 👍

The changes are narrowly focused

The changes in this pull request appear to be narrowly focused on fixing the setting of Pardiso iparm and dparm parameters. There are no indications of the author trying to resolve multiple issues simultaneously. The changes seem to be concentrated on addressing a specific problem related to the Pardiso iparm and dparm parameters.

Testing ⚠️

Testing details are missing in the description

The description provided in the pull request is empty, so it does not describe how the author tested the changes. It would be beneficial to have information about the testing approach and any specific test cases that were used to verify the fix. This would provide transparency and help reviewers understand the extent of the testing performed.

Code Changes 👍

The code changes are appropriate and seem to address the issue

The changes in the code seem to address the issue of setting the Pardiso iparm and dparm parameters. The modifications in the LinearSolvePardisoExt.jl file and the test/pardiso/pardiso.jl file are specific to the problem at hand and do not seem to introduce any new issues.

Suggested Changes

  • Please provide a brief description in the pull request to provide more context and clarify the specific problem that was addressed.
  • Please provide information about the testing approach and any specific test cases that were used to verify the fix.

Reviewed with AI Maintainer

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 24, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #367 (14ed061) into main (f531dd0) will decrease coverage by 0.08%.
The diff coverage is 0.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #367      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   69.95%   69.88%   -0.08%     
==========================================
  Files          20       20              
  Lines        1428     1428              
==========================================
- Hits          999      998       -1     
- Misses        429      430       +1     
Files Changed Coverage Δ
ext/LinearSolvePardisoExt.jl 73.91% <0.00%> (ø)

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

@ChrisRackauckas ChrisRackauckas merged commit 7c9141f into SciML:main Aug 24, 2023
13 of 17 checks passed
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.

2 participants