|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
| |
|
|
| |
| == Issues for next (Dec. 4) WebEx meeting: ==
| |
|
| |
| Agenda:
| |
|
| |
| I. Introduce Dr. A. Kot (NCSA/UIUC)
| |
| -- Multi-layered Runtime System (Brief overview of RTS)
| |
|
| |
| II. Input (use .tri format, FUN3D) to expose advantages of proposed approach and calibrate current vision
| |
| -- Address short to medium term needs of NASA/LaRC, identify issues to calibrate current vision presented in the proposal
| |
| -- Expose potential advantages of AFLR3 and MOESS, issues to be addressed in the future
| |
|
| |
| '''-- What is that we can do with FUND3D when it comes to managing geometries?'''
| |
|
| |
| III. Parallel Mesh Generation
| |
| -- PDR: targets cores in a single node (Year 2) nodes within a single rack (Year 3)
| |
| -- Issues:
| |
| Pros:required minimum (but non trivial) interaction between software pieces & groups
| |
| multiplier for speculative approach for cores within a single chip (initially node).
| |
| Cons: Scalability (small) due to local synchronization, startup overhead
| |
| -- Use input geometries to identify I/O overheads due to geometry, use this is the mac budget to jump-start PDR
| |
| Programming Paradigm: OpenMP (need modifications)
| |
| Define an API between PDR and AFLR3
| |
|
| |
| -- Optimistic fine-grain parallelization: targets cores within a single chip, shared memory
| |
| A. direct use of a fully functional AFLR3 (new re-organized code)
| |
| B. indirect use of parallel Delaunay-based PODM approach in the parametric space
| |
| C. investigate building from scratch new parallel implementation from a simpler AFT-code and build functionality as we go
| |
| D. evaluate a bottom up approach starting from parallel triangulation, etc.. (Juliette)
| |
| Programming Paradigm: C++ with concurrency constructs, potential extensions of paradigm used in JLAB's QCD example-approach (challenging)
| |
| See JIT in Resources.
| |
|
| |
| -- Constrained Parallel Mesh generation: targets racks or super-nodes
| |
| Issues:
| |
| Cons: asynchronous
| |
| Pros: not straight forward generalization of 2D (split of a face is not unique)
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| Remaining Internal (ODU/MIT/MSU) Issues:
| |
| i) Interaction between MOESS and AFLR3 i.e., API (sequential code can be used as is at this point)
| |
| ii Interaction between PDR and AFLR3 (API is the goal, a closer look of the AFLR3 code at ODU
| |
| will help to build an optimal API) and study separation of concerns between PDR and AFLR3
| |
| iii) Study overheads for pre-processing (Geometry, AFLR3 might require).
| |
| iv) Set milestones and deliverables for semi-annual report
| |
| v) Software License and potential IP issues.
| |