On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Roy Stogner <email@example.com> wrote:
1. User code is responsible for correctly adding all extra entries toeach processor's sparsity rows on that processor. This should still
work fine now.
2. User code can add extra remote sparsity entries to the new
nonlocal part of the sparsity pattern, and then they get passed on to
the right processors in the communications step. This would be work
after I move one line.
You know, supporting (2) wouldn't actually add anything to
computational cost and wouldn't interfere with support for (1). I'm
leaning toward (2) now. ;-)