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

Parallelization of Wannier functions plotting disappeared in the latest develop branch #503

Open
npaulish opened this issue May 15, 2024 · 6 comments · May be fixed by #505
Open

Parallelization of Wannier functions plotting disappeared in the latest develop branch #503

npaulish opened this issue May 15, 2024 · 6 comments · May be fixed by #505
Milestone

Comments

@npaulish
Copy link
Collaborator

As I also mentioned in the email to @JeromeCCP9, even though #370 was merged, wannier_plot is not parallelized in the latest develop branch.
Maybe there could be also other PRs that disappeared after merging the library mode?
FYI @jiang-yuha0 @qiaojunfeng @giovannipizzi

@npaulish npaulish added this to the v4.0 milestone May 15, 2024
@PeterKraus
Copy link

I think #332 could be another victim, see #332 (comment)

@JeromeCCP9
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi Peter! Thank you for flagging this up, I will track it down...

@giovannipizzi
Copy link
Member

Thanks Peter! @JeromeCCP9 I now have a strong feeling that quite a few PRs might have been discarded. We'll have to check several of them, probably in a time range, I imagine from when you started working in the code onwards. It might be that most of them are actually lost, as you worked on top of earlier versions?

@giovannipizzi
Copy link
Member

There are I think 34 merged PRs between 3.1 and the merge of the library interface. I would check all. Hopefully about a half should be not on the code (tests, docs,...) so those should be OK. So hopefully there are not that many that could have been lost. But the others might require a bit of work to re implement in the new code structure

@JeromeCCP9
Copy link
Collaborator

yes, this is true. The corresponding commits exists in the history, but the changes are exactly undone in the current state of develop. I think this means a merge has gone wrong, which is a small nightmare. I investigate more.

@JeromeCCP9
Copy link
Collaborator

JeromeCCP9 commented Jun 12, 2024

yap, I caused this in merge 6f7859e ; merging the use of types, Feb 2021. Unfortunately it is not a merge commit, so I must have rebased incorrectly. From the date, I can see that this will indeed affect a couple of other PRs.

I'm so sorry about this! I work to resolve it.

JeromeCCP9 pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jun 20, 2024
…e as in wannier90

cherry-picking commit 5d872a9

fixes an unintended reversion or mangled merge, as discussed in issue #503
@JeromeCCP9 JeromeCCP9 linked a pull request Jun 20, 2024 that will close this issue
@JeromeCCP9 JeromeCCP9 linked a pull request Jun 23, 2024 that will close this issue
JeromeCCP9 pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jun 26, 2024
…e as in wannier90

cherry-picking commit 5d872a9

fixes an unintended reversion or mangled merge, as discussed in issue #503
JeromeCCP9 pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jul 29, 2024
…e as in wannier90

cherry-picking commit 5d872a9

fixes an unintended reversion or mangled merge, as discussed in issue #503
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants