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

Define FFT planning flags independent from FFTW #71

Open
david-macmahon opened this issue Jul 9, 2022 · 2 comments
Open

Define FFT planning flags independent from FFTW #71

david-macmahon opened this issue Jul 9, 2022 · 2 comments

Comments

@david-macmahon
Copy link

The FFT planning functions, plan_fft et al., accept a keyword argument flags that is used to provide options to the planning function of the FFT implementation. The flags argument is currently documented to be "a bitwise-or of FFTW planner flags". This effectively creates a documented dependency on FFTW, even though FFTW is not a dependency of AbstractFFTs (in fact it's the other way around). It would be preferable to have AbstractFFTs define any and all flags that FFT planners may wish to use and then have FFT implementations, such as FFTW, adapt the flags from AbstractFFTs values to suitable values for use with the underlying implementation as they see fit.

For an example of why the current approach is problematic, see JuliaGPU/CUDA.jl#1559

@roflmaostc
Copy link
Contributor

I totally support this and would find it nice since I already created several workarounds in my packages because of that.

@liuyxpp
Copy link

liuyxpp commented Sep 22, 2024

Any progress here?

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants