Caliper support

[artv3]

Initial pass at building with Caliper and plugins:

To build:

 cmake -DRAJA_ENABLE_RUNTIME_PLUGINS=ON  -DRAJA_ENABLE_CALIPER=ON 
 Dcaliper_DIR=${PATH_TO_CALIPER}/share/cmake/caliper ../

Example run:

CALI_CONFIG=runtime-report ./bin/raja-forall-caliper 

Example output:

RAJA daxpy example...

 Running C-version of daxpy...
C-version elapsed time : 0.000800389 seconds

 Running RAJA sequential daxpy...
 found a kernel name: CALI: RAJA Seq daxpy Kernel assigning it to kernel... 
C-version elapsed time : 0.00073108 seconds

	 result -- PASS

 Running RAJA SIMD daxpy...
 found a kernel name: CALI: RAJA SIMD daxpy Kernel assigning it to kernel... 
C-version elapsed time : 0.000618763 seconds

	 result -- PASS

 DONE!...
Path                           Time (E) Time (I) Time % (E) Time % (I) 
main                           0.014619 0.016770  85.817194  98.442387 
  CALI: C-version elapsed time 0.000825 0.000825   4.841826   4.841826 
  CALI: RAJA Seq daxpy Kernel  0.000716 0.000716   4.201835   4.201835 
  CALI: RAJA SIMD daxpy Kernel 0.000610 0.000610   3.581532   3.581532

Observations:
Caliper timings are consistent with the RAJA timer function.

//----------------

Example with RAJA launch
RAJA daxpy example...

 Running C-version of daxpy...
C-version elapsed time : 0.00844832 seconds

 Running launch sequential daxpy...
-----RAJA launch!----
C-version elapsed time : 0.000656656 seconds

	 result -- PASS

 DONE!...
Path                         Time (E) Time (I) Time % (E) Time % (I) 
CALI: C-version elapsed time 0.000742 0.000742  15.170097  15.170097 
CALI: launch kernel          0.000643 0.000643  13.152635  13.152635 

TODO:

• Handle the case in which no kernel name is provided.....
• Remove old kernel naming interface from RAJA::launch
• Documentation, examples, and slides....
• Clean up code

This PR changes KernelName -> Name

[artv3]

TODO: Compare the Caliper results with standard timers.

[artv3]

This isn't quite done, but I do want to trigger the CI to double check that we are passing test across the board.

[artv3]

Everything should now be addressed, thanks team!

[rhornung67]

One minor comment, which you can choose to ignore.

[artv3]

@LLNL/raja-core , I think we should be good to go now -- I also turned on RAJA_ENABLE_PLUGINS within our docker clang15 build. Would someone be able to weigh in if that would have caught @MrBurmark's expected build test failure?

Any objections to merging if this comes out green?

[MrBurmark]

I explicitly added a "getPlugin" test and manually confirmed that it fails if the "getPlugin" loading code is not there.
I went ahead and approved the PR.

[artv3]

I explicitly added a "getPlugin" test and manually confirmed that it fails if the "getPlugin" loading code is not there. I went ahead and approved the PR.

Awesome! Thanks!