Skip to content

Conversation

@bennibolm
Copy link
Contributor

@bennibolm bennibolm commented Nov 10, 2025

This PR speeds up the implementation of perform_idp_correction! by

  • looping over subcell interfaces for i in 2:nnodes(dg) instead of nodes for i in eachnode(dg) since no ifs are needed anymore.
  • using multiply_add_to_node_vars!

Performance difference for polynomial degree of 3 (I'm using 1024 elements):

julia> @btime Trixi.perform_idp_correction!($u, $dt, $mesh, $equations, $solver, $cache)
  173.679 μs (0 allocations: 0 bytes)

julia> @btime Trixi.perform_idp_correction_new!($u, $dt, $mesh, $equations, $solver, $cache)
  137.115 μs (0 allocations: 0 bytes)

Polynomial degree of 5:

julia> @btime Trixi.perform_idp_correction!($u, $dt, $mesh, $equations, $solver, $cache)
  466.543 μs (0 allocations: 0 bytes)

julia> @btime Trixi.perform_idp_correction_new!($u, $dt, $mesh, $equations, $solver, $cache)
  308.394 μs (0 allocations: 0 bytes)

This was with Julia 1.12 on 1 thread.

@bennibolm bennibolm added performance We are greedy refactoring Refactoring code without functional changes labels Nov 10, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Review checklist

This checklist is meant to assist creators of PRs (to let them know what reviewers will typically look for) and reviewers (to guide them in a structured review process). Items do not need to be checked explicitly for a PR to be eligible for merging.

Purpose and scope

  • The PR has a single goal that is clear from the PR title and/or description.
  • All code changes represent a single set of modifications that logically belong together.
  • No more than 500 lines of code are changed or there is no obvious way to split the PR into multiple PRs.

Code quality

  • The code can be understood easily.
  • Newly introduced names for variables etc. are self-descriptive and consistent with existing naming conventions.
  • There are no redundancies that can be removed by simple modularization/refactoring.
  • There are no leftover debug statements or commented code sections.
  • The code adheres to our conventions and style guide, and to the Julia guidelines.

Documentation

  • New functions and types are documented with a docstring or top-level comment.
  • Relevant publications are referenced in docstrings (see example for formatting).
  • Inline comments are used to document longer or unusual code sections.
  • Comments describe intent ("why?") and not just functionality ("what?").
  • If the PR introduces a significant change or new feature, it is documented in NEWS.md with its PR number.

Testing

  • The PR passes all tests.
  • New or modified lines of code are covered by tests.
  • New or modified tests run in less then 10 seconds.

Performance

  • There are no type instabilities or memory allocations in performance-critical parts.
  • If the PR intent is to improve performance, before/after time measurements are posted in the PR.

Verification

  • The correctness of the code was verified using appropriate tests.
  • If new equations/methods are added, a convergence test has been run and the results
    are posted in the PR.

Created with ❤️ by the Trixi.jl community.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 10, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 96.85%. Comparing base (acc3215) to head (e1d0170).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2644   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   96.85%   96.85%           
=======================================
  Files         546      546           
  Lines       43208    43211    +3     
=======================================
+ Hits        41849    41852    +3     
  Misses       1359     1359           
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 96.85% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

Copy link
Member

@DanielDoehring DanielDoehring left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Cool!

Some minor comments regarding code explanatory

DanielDoehring
DanielDoehring previously approved these changes Nov 12, 2025
@bennibolm bennibolm marked this pull request as ready for review November 12, 2025 15:37
DanielDoehring
DanielDoehring previously approved these changes Nov 12, 2025
@bennibolm
Copy link
Contributor Author

The failing downstream test is expected since the test results from the sedov blast example slightly changed. I will adapt the file in Trixi2Vtk.jl when this one here is merged.

@bennibolm bennibolm marked this pull request as draft November 13, 2025 08:50
@bennibolm
Copy link
Contributor Author

bennibolm commented Nov 13, 2025

Since the first 3d PR is merged, I will also add the updated version of the 3d correction stage in this PR.

@bennibolm
Copy link
Contributor Author

I added the new (updated) version of the 3d correction stage in e407366.
We get a similar speed up:
Polynomial degree of 3 (512 elements):

julia> @btime Trixi.perform_idp_correction!($u, $dt, $mesh, $equations, $solver, $cache)
  824.662 μs (0 allocations: 0 bytes)
julia> @btime Trixi.perform_idp_correction_new!($u, $dt, $mesh, $equations, $solver, $cache)
  740.468 μs (0 allocations: 0 bytes)

and with polynomial degree of 5:

julia> @btime Trixi.perform_idp_correction!($u, $dt, $mesh, $equations, $solver, $cache)
  3.046 ms (0 allocations: 0 bytes)
julia> @btime Trixi.perform_idp_correction_new!($u, $dt, $mesh, $equations, $solver, $cache)
  2.499 ms (0 allocations: 0 bytes)

@DanielDoehring DanielDoehring added the downstream changes affecting downstream packages label Nov 13, 2025
@bennibolm bennibolm marked this pull request as ready for review November 13, 2025 13:21
@bennibolm bennibolm requested a review from amrueda November 13, 2025 15:40
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

downstream changes affecting downstream packages performance We are greedy refactoring Refactoring code without functional changes

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants