Case statements switched to if/else for ordering.f90#239
Open
Case statements switched to if/else for ordering.f90#239
Conversation
Member
|
Can you remove, rather than comment, the old code? |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
During the TGV case run I tested for 1000 iterations and AMD uProfiler output showed 10 hottest functions and it turns out to be the
reorder_ompis the second highest time consuming function which repeatedly calls the modulem_ordering. Before diving deep with algorithmic optimisations I wanted to try something with slight modifications. I noticed that it usesselect casefor decisions instead ofif else. This is not ideal for the compiler. So I modified them to be if/else statement.Disclaimer would be this change is not necessary for other modules because they are not the first or second hottest functions.
The 1000 TGV run
Before:
After:
Overall, for 20000 case I would expect at least ~3 minute improvement with execution time which is not massive but good small step forward