Re: [deal.II] Re: Status of matrix-free CUDA support

Bruno and Martin, Thank you for your responses. I'll try to get a CUDA version of step-48 up and running. Thanks! Steve On Monday, November 5, 2018 at 3:18:25 PM UTC-5, Martin Kronbichler wrote: > > Steve, > > Just to add on what Bruno said: Explicit time integration typically > requires only a

Re: [deal.II] Re: Status of matrix-free CUDA support

Steve, Just to add on what Bruno said: Explicit time integration typically requires only a subset of what you need for running an iterative solver (no decision making like in convergence test of conjugate gradient, no preconditioner), so running that should be pretty straight-forward. Best,

[deal.II] Re: Status of matrix-free CUDA support

Steve On Monday, October 29, 2018 at 10:43:48 AM UTC-4, Stephen DeWitt wrote: > > So far I've read through the "CUDA Support" issue > , the "Roadmap for > inclusion of GPU implementation of matrix free in Deal.II" issue >

[deal.II] Re: Status of matrix-free CUDA support

I thought that I'd re-up this thread, since it didn't get any responses. I apologize if the questions are a bit broad. Typically, I spend a bit of time trying to get some code working myself before posting a question here, but I don't currently have a machine with a NVIDIA GPU. If the CUDA suppo