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

Test for ViewSubView copy operation #160

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

erikzenker
Copy link
Member

This PR add two test cases for the ViewSubView class. The first test verifies the copy operation based on a static buffer. The second test verifies the copy operation based on varying buffer sizes and dimensions.

This PR still includes fixes of #158 and #157. The test case can not run through because of #159.

}
case 4:
{
std::vector<Elem> v2{75, 76, 78, 79, 91, 92, 95, 96, 139, 140, 143, 144, 155, 156, 159, 160};
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

For now it would be good if you could comment out the 4 dimensional case here and use if(Dim::value != 4u) in the other test case. This would allow us to merge this independently of a 4D copy support.

@BenjaminW3 BenjaminW3 self-assigned this Feb 1, 2016
@erikzenker
Copy link
Member Author

Update

//! Prints all elements of the buffer.
//-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
struct PrintBufferKernel {
template <typename TAcc,
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Could you please begin with the first type indented on a new line? Furthermore, alpaka does not currently use a space before the <.

@BenjaminW3
Copy link
Member

Thanks for providing such extensive tests!

@erikzenker
Copy link
Member Author

The logs of the CI are getting to long. Could we reduce the ALPAKA_DEBUG level ?

@BenjaminW3 BenjaminW3 mentioned this pull request Feb 3, 2016
@BenjaminW3
Copy link
Member

I have acepted this Pull Request. However, I have taken it as a base to try to reduce the number of lines written into the log in #164 before it can finally get onto the develop branch.
Therefore this Pull Request will get closed for now and I will work on #164.

@BenjaminW3 BenjaminW3 closed this Feb 4, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

CUDA full n-dimensional support
2 participants